n 


3 


/ 


OF  THE 

Theological   Seminary, 

PRINCETON,  N.  J. 

^   BX  9946  -Mil  1825 

^'''    McCalla,  W.  L.  1788-1859. 

^^,  Discussion  of  universalism 


Hoc 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2009  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/discussionofunivOOmcca 


DISCUSSION 


OF 


UNIVEKSALISM, 


OR  A 


^tftntt  of  <!lri|po9o|r^ 

AGAINST  THE  HERESY  OF  UNIVERSALISM, 
AS  ADVOCATED  BY  MR.  ABNER  KNEELAND, 

IN  THE  ITNIVERSALISr  CHURCH,  LOMBARD  STREET, 
JULY,  1824, 

AND    IN    HIS    VARIOUS    PUBLICATIONS, 

AS  ALSO  ZK  THOSE  OF  MR.  BAIfZiOU,  AlTD  OTKSR8. 


rH£  PBOFITS  07  TBE  IDtFBESSIOlT  TO  00  TO  THE  fVITOS  07  THE  TOXTSQ  USS's  DO- 
KSSTIC  MISSIOITART  SOCIETY,  COHFOSED  OF  OIFFEBSNT  DENOUISATIORSt 


BY  W.  £.  M'CAXIA^ 


rBtXADBWHIl ;  PBIKTID  BT  JOHN  TOTTNa,  34,  50BTH  xniBD  ^TBEET, 

1823.* 


Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania,  to  wit : 

Be  it  remembered,  that  on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  January-,  in 
the  forty -hinih  year  of  the  fndepcndence  of  the  United  States  of 
America,  A.  D  1825,  WILLIAM  LATTA  M'CALLA,  of  the 
said  District,  hath  deposited  i«  this  Office  the  Title  of  a  Book,  the 
right  whereof  he  claims  as  Aothor,  in  the  woi'ds  following, 
to  wit : 

"  A  Discussion  of  Universalism  ;  or  a  Defence  of  Orthodoxy,  against  the 
"  Heresy  of  Universalism,  as  advocated  by  Mr.  Abner  Kneeland,  in  the  Debate  in 
"  the  Universalist  Church  ia  Lombard-street,  July,  1824,  and  in  his  various  pnblica* 
*'  tions,  as  also,  in  those  of  Mr.  Ballou  and  others.  The  profits  of  the  impression 
"to  go  to  the  Funds  of  the  Young,  Men's  Domestic  Missionary  Society,  composed 
*'  of  different  denominations.     By  W.  L.  M'Calla." 

In  conformity  to  the  Act  of  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  entitled,  "  An 
Act  for  the  Encouragement  of  Learning,  by  securing  the  Copies  of  Maps, 
Charts,  and  Books  to  the  Authors  and  Proprietors  of  such  Copies,  during  the 
times  therein  mentioned  ;" — And  also  to  the  Act,  entitled,  "  An  Act  for  the 
Encouragement  of  Learning,  bj  securing  the  Capies  of  Maps,  Charts,  and  Books 
to  the  AuUiors  and  Proprietors  of  such  Copies  during  the  times  therein  mention- 
ed," and  extending  the  Benefits  thereof  to  the  Arts  of  designing,  engraving,  and 
etching  historical  and  other  prints." 

D.  CALDWELL, 
Clerk  of  the  Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 


PREFACE. 


SHORTLY  after  my  arrival  in  this  place,  last  May,  intor- 
mation  was  received  from  various  (juarters,  tiiat  Mr.  Kneeland 
had  long  been  in  the  habit  of  defying  the  armies  of  the  living 
God,  and  of  glorying  in  their  silence  as  the  eftect  of  consci  »us 
guilt  and  error.  Aware  of  my  own  weakness,  but  confiding  in 
the  Great  Head  of  the  Church,  it  was  impossible  to  conceal  my 
desire  that  he  would  challenge  we.  A  mutual  friend  gave  hiiu 
an  intimation  of  my  willingness  to  accept  a  personal  invitation, 
but  without  effect.  His  general  challenge  was  then  made  the 
ground  of  a  correspondence  wliich  terminated  in  a  public  con- 
ference. This  was  not,  by  any  means,  intended  to  supercede 
the  necessity  of  a  printed  defence,  but  to  excite  the  public  at- 
tention to  such  a  work,  and  to  make  it  more  worthy  oi  their  pa- 
tronage^  as  well  as  to  silence  the  audacious  boasting  of  this  enemy 
of  God  and  man.  He  soon  betrayed  a  great  anxiety  to  terminate 
the  debate.  After  several  unsuccessful  efforts,  he  cut  it  short  by 
virtually  closing  the  door  of  his  (?esAupon  me.  Sickness  and  the 
heat  of  the  city  soon  obliged  me  to  retire  to  the  country.  This  was 
called  a  retreat^  and  it  was  boldly  and  publicly  denied  that  the 
doors  of  the  church  were  shut  upon  me.  To  settle  these  points, 
an  offer  was  made  to  resume  the  discussion,  which  offer  he  was 
very  far  from  accepting.  To  retrieve  their  loss,  a  Universalist 
preacher,  a  pretended  stenographer,  was  employed  to  write  the  de- 
bate in  such  a  way  as  to  transfer  the  victory  from  one  side  to  the 
other.  Although  he  at  first  promised  verbal  accuracy,  he  at  last 
professed  io  ^\\q  the  argument  only:  but  this  was  as  far  be- 
yond his  capacity  as  it  was  contrary  to  his  wish.  The  performance 
of  his  enterprise  v/ith  fidelity  and  ability,  would  have  been  much 
more  gratifying  to  me  and  my  friends  than  to  him  and  his.  Yet 
every  one  conversant  with  such  matters,  knows  that  in  such  dis- 
cussions, an  argument  is  more  diluted  than  it  should  be  when 
committed  to  paper;  and  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  record  repeated 
refutations  of  the  same  error,  which  were  made  necessary  in 
debate,  in  order  to  meet  the  extemporaneous  and  reiterated  effu- 
sions of  heretical  sophistry.  Although  the  employed  stenogra- 
pher professed  to  do  justice  to  my  argument,  he  has  been  guilty  of 
such  omissions  and  interpolations,  transpositions  and  alterations, 
as  were  calculated  to  destroy  it.     While,  for  the  sake  of  perspi- 


IV 

cuity  and  precision,  I  take  the  liberty  of  arranging  and  condens- 
ing the  matter  of  the  discussion,  in  such  a  manner  as  is  suitable 
to  written  composition,  the  hearer  will  see  that  real  justice  i« 
done  to  the  argument  on  both  sides.  As  my  opponent  has  had  a 
full  opportunity  of  speaking  for  himself,  so,  in  revising  and 
correcting  the  work  of  his  employed  Reporter,  he  has  had  a  full 
opportunity  of  writing  for  himself.  To  copy  all  that  he  has  pub- 
lished, through  his  stenographer,  for  himself  and  for  me,  is  not 
my  design.  Any  one  who  has  read  those  drowsy  pages  will 
readily  excuse  me,  and  any  one  who  has  not,  may  see  a  fair 
specimen  in  the  piece  signed  Long-hand^  published  in  the  De- 
mocratic Press,  of  Sept.  22nd,  and  copied  in  No.  21,  of  the  In- 
troductory Documents  in  this  work.  This  is  one  of  the  least 
important  of  many  newspaper  publications  connected  with  this 
controversy,  with  which  it  is  thought  proper  to  occupy  the  first 
part  of  this  volume.  For  reasons  explained  in  the  intro- 
ductory documents,  its  bulk  will  also  be  increased  by  additional 
matter  both  in  confirmation  and  refutation;  and  the  latter  of 
these  shall  now  take  the  precedency,  as  the  arguments  of  my 
opponent  are  all  before  me,  in  what  he  calls  "as  faithful  a  xt^ 
port  as  ever  waa  made." 


INTRODUCTORY  DOCUMENTS. 

No.  1. 
THE  CHALLENGE. 


In  the  Philadelphia  edition  of  Buck's  Theological  Dic- 
tionary, by  Edwin  T.  Scott,  1823,  Mr.  Kneeland,  under 
the  article  IJniversalists,  boasts  that  several  works  wiitten 
by  himself  and  Mr.  Ballou,  "  have  never  been  answered." 
He  was  also  in  the  habit  of  giving  challenges  from  the  pul- 
pit, and  he  and  his  followers  were  in  the  practice  of  boasting 
that  they  were  not  accepted.  In  a  note  attached  to  his  8th 
Lecture,  he  says,  *•  at  each  publication,  the  learned  clergy 
have  been  respectfully  called  upon  to  shew  wherein  these 
statements  are  incorrect.  They  have  not  seen  fit  to  do  it ; 
and  it  is  believed,  for  this  good  reason,  because  they  know 
the  statements  are  true.  As,  therefore,  the  most  important 
facts  contained  in  this  Lecture  have  been  more  than  thirteen 
years  before  the  public,  and  yet  remain  uncontroverted,they 
now  come  foith  w  ith  this  additional  evidence  of  their  truth. 
Because  it  is  fair  to  presume  (the  facts  here  stated  being  so 
important  in  themselves  to  the  cause  of  religion)  that  if  they 
could  have  been  contradicted,  with  any  colour  of  evidence, 
they  would  have  been  before  this  time.'*  The  following  are 
extracts  from  the  preface  to  his  Lectures,  viz.  "  The  work 
has  had  an  opportunity  to  be  fully  tested  by  public  opinion; 
and  notwithstanding  the  substance  of  the  eighth  Lecture 
(which  is  the  most  important  of  any  in  point  of  doctrine,) 
has  been  before  the  public  nearly  twenty  years,  and  it  is 
now  more  than  five  years  since  this  work  was  first  publish- 
ed, yet  no  one  has  attempted  to  point  out  a  single  error,  in 
relation  to  the  facts  as  herein  stated,  or  to  shew  that  any  of 
the  arguments  are  either  unfounded  or  inconclusive.  This 
is  considered  as  a  silent  acknowledgement,  that  in  the 
opinion  of  the  clergy  generally,  the  work  is  unanswerable : 
otherwise,  being  so  often  and  so  respectfully  called  up(m  to 
consider  the  doctrine  and  arguments  here  advanced,  and 
point  out  the  errors,  if  there  be  any,  it  is  difficult  to  account 


VI 

for  their  silence  on  this  suhject."  "  He  therefore  once  more 
respectfully  invites  SkuA  intreats  the  clergy  of  other  denomi- 
nations, or  some  one  of  them,  the  more  learned  the  better, 
to  discuss  this  important  subject  with  him,  and  to  p*.int  out 
to  him  and  the  public,  the  supposed  errors  of  the  following 
work." 


^o.  2. 

THE  ^CCEFT^NCE. 

Mr.  Kneeland, 

It  is  said  that  the  Universalists  have  two  Churches  in  the 
city,  and  there  is  a  report  in  circulation  that  permission  has 
been  asked  and  obtained  for  me  to  preach  in  one  of  them. 
If  I  ever  gave  leave  to  any  of  my  friends  to  make  this  re- 
quest for  me,  (whicli  is  quite  probable,)  it  was  done  inad- 
vertently. But  as  it  was  granted,  I  take  this  opportunity 
of  acknowledging  the  favour,  and  of  informing  you.  or  your 
friends  through  you,  that  for  the  present,  the  acceptance  of 
it  is  declined.  This  is  done,  not  from  a  belief  that  it  is  un- 
lawful to  preach  our  distinguishing  doctrines  in  such  a  place, 
butb  ecause  I  prefer  coming  in  contact  with  you,  in  a  man- 
ner which  has  hitherto  been  more  agreeable  to  your  own 
wishes.  I  am  informed  that  you  have  discussed  the  most 
prominent  question  in  your  creed  with  several  laymen,  and 
that  you  have,  privately  and  publicly,  given  verbal  and  writ- 
ten invitations  to  the  clergy  in  general,  to  defend  their  faith 
in  public  debate.  This  general  invitation  was  published, 
perhaps,  in  the  first  edition  of  your  "  Lectures  on  the  doc- 
trine of  Universal  Benevolence,"  in  1819.  You  tell  us  that 
this  w  as  not  noticed.  In  the  preface  of  your  2d  edition,  in 
the  present  year,  you  inform  us,  that  "  this  is  considered  as 
a  silent  acknowledgment  that,  in  the  opinion  of  the  clergy 
generally,  the  work  is  unanswerable  :  otherwise,  being  so 
often  and  so  respectfully  called  upon  to  consider  the  doc- 
trine and  arguments  here  advanced,  and  point  out  the  er- 
rors, if  there  be  any,  it  is  difficult  to  account  for  their  silence 
on  this  subject."  Subsequently,  in  page  198,  you  inform 
us  in  a  note,  that  your  principles  were  published  in  New 
Hampshire,  in  1805,  and  New- York,  1816.  "  And  at  each 
publication  the  learned  clergy  have  been  respectfully  called 
upon  to^shew  wherein  these  statements  are  incorrect.  They 


VII 

have  not  seen  ht  to  do  it,  and  it  is  believed,  for  this  good 
reason. because  they  know  the  statements  are  true."  Ac- 
cordingly, in  the  prefareof  this  2d  edition,  "The  author,*' 
"once  more,  respectfully  invites  and  entreats  the  clergy  of 
other  denominations,  or  some  one  of  them,  the  more  learned 
the  better,  to  discuss  this  important  subject  with  him  ;  and 
to  point  out  to  him  and  the  public,  the  supposed  errors  of 
the  following  work." 

When  your  friends  witness  your  great  anxiety  to  submit 
your  sentiments  to  unlimited  investigation  by  word  or 
writing,  in  private  or  in  public,  they  admire  and  praise  your 
candour  and  magnanimity,  in  proportion  as  they  condemn 
our  reluctance  to  encountei-  you.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  we 
shall  not  now  change  sides,  and  that  a  willingness  on  our 
part  shall  not  cool  your  ardour  for  the  contest.  If  God 
spare  my  life,  it  appears  pr(»bable  that  I  shall  labour  for  some 
time  in  the  city  Without  any  clainjs  to  superior  learning, 
I  do,  after  prayer  and  mature  deliberation,  feel  disposed  to 
comply  with  your  reasonable  requisition,  and  to  gratify 
your  repeated  and  urgent  entreaties  for  a  public  discussion. 
That  this  may  be  prosecuted  to  advantage,  it  should  be  done 
in  an  orderly  manner,  according  to  a  plan  previously  ar- 
ranged. If  you  agree  to  such  a  measure,  1  should  be  glad, 
if,  in  your  answer  to  this  letter,  you  would  give  me  the  pre- 
cise point  which  you  inean  to  defend,  in  opposition  to  the 
absolute  eternity  of  the  sinners  future  punishment.  Do  you 
plead  for  the  annihilation  of  the  wicked,  as  the  Destruction- 
ists  do  t  Do  you  believe  in  their  restoration  to  heaven  after 
being  punished  in  hell  ?  And  if  so,  do  you  believe  this  pun- 
ishment to  be  gratuitous,  disciplinary,  penitentiary,  or  sa- 
tisfactory? 0*"  do  you  believe  that  they  are  all,  without  going 
to  hell,  saved  at  death,  or  at  the  general  resurrection,  after 
receiving  condign  punishment  on  earth,  or  after  receiving, 
not  a  condign,  but  a  gratuitous,  a  penitentiary,  or  a  disci- 
plinary punishment  ?  It  is  hoped  that  your  answer,  as  soon 
as  convenient,  will  prepare  the  way  for  a  speedy  meeting. 

W.  L.  M'CALLA. 
Philadelphia,  69,  North  Third-street.     July  2, 1824. 

Mr.  Abner  Rneeland. 


No.  3. 
Mr.  M*Calla, 

Your  letter  of  July  2d  was  received  during  my  absence. 
I  returned  from  New  York  last  evening,  and  embrace  the 


vm 


first  opportunity  this  morning  to  reply.  You  arc  under  an 
entire  mistake,  sir,  in  supposing  that  I  have  •  privately  and 
publicly  given  verbal  and  written  invitations  to  the  clergy 
in  general  to  defend  their  faith  in  public  debate."  I  have 
never  solicited  a  public  debate  with  any  man,  either  clergy- 
man or  layman,  unless  what  1  have  written  in  the  preface  to 
the  second  edition  to  my  lectures  can  be  so  construed.  And 
even  there  the  discussion  is  limited  to  the  supposed  errors  of 
that  work  ;  at  the  same  time  nothing  is  said  about  a  public 
debate.  My  ideas  are  before  the  public,  in  print,  and  if  any 
important  errors  are  contained  in  them,  I  expect  they  will 
be  pointed  out  to  me  and  the  public  in  the  same  way ;  namely, 
from  the  press.  That  1  have  discussed  some  important  doc- 
trinal points  with  laymen,  in  a  society  instituted  for  that 
purpose,  is  true ;  and  I  wish  to  have  it  distinctly  understood, 
that  while  I  have  never  solicited  a  public  debate  with  any 
man,  I  have  never  declined  one,  and  should  I  now  come  in 
"contact"  with  a  clergyman,  in  this  way,  it  would  not  be 
the  first  time.  What  I  have  solicited,  is  to  have  the  suppos- 
ed errors  of  my  Lectures  pointed  out :  If  that  is  to  be  the 
subject,  the  discussion  must  be  limited  to  what  is  there 
written. 

Should  the  subject  of  the  Lectures  be  waived,  (to  which  I 
have  no  objection,)  I  should  come  to  the  main  question  at 
once,  namely,  Does  the  law  of  God  require  that  sin,  com- 
mitted here  in  time,  and  in  this  state  of  mortality,  should  be 
punished  in  eternity,  or  beyond  death,  meaning  to  be  under- 
stood by  that  term,  a  dissolution  of  this  mortal  existence  I 
I  shall  deny  the  existence  of  any  such  law,  and  consequent- 
ly of  any  such  punishment  Hence  we  should  have  no  occasi- 
on to  discuss  either  the  nature  or  the  duration  of  punishment, 
imless  X\\t  fact  can  first  be  proved.  1  shall  contend,  how- 
ever, that  no  punishment,  as  comingfrom  God  will  be  incom- 
patible with  infinite  and  divine  love  to  the  individual  that  is 
punished.  A.  KNEELAND. 

Philadelphia^  31  South  Second  st.  July  7,  1824. 

Mr.  W.  L.  M'Calla. 


No.  4. 
Mr.  Kneeland, 

Yours  of  yesterday  has  been  duly  re/ceived.  You  inform 
me  that  you  have  "  never  solicited  a  public  debate  with  any 
man,"  though  you  *'  have  never  declined  one ;"  and  that  yow 


m 

have,  before  now,  come  in  contact,  in  this  way,  both  with  the 
laity  and  the  clergy.  As  vt>u  proless  a  williugne-ss  to  do  the 
same  again,  we  will  leave  the  community  to  judge  whether  all 
that  you  have  said  and  done,  and  written  aud  published^ 
will  amount  to  an  invitation  or  not. 

As  we  have  soon  agreed  to  meet,  the  preliminary  regula- 
tions need  not  occasion  much  deUy.  1  would  propose  the 
following. 


Hules  of  conference  adopted  and  signed  this  day  of 

1824,  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia^  by  Ahner  Kne%' 
land  and  W.  L.  M^Calla.     Duplicates  given  to  the  parties, 

1.  The  proposition  for*  discussion  shall  be  as  follows,  viz. 
Is  the  future  punishment  of  the  wicked  absolutely  eternal  ? 
or  is  it  only  a  temporal  punishment  in  this  world,  for  their 
good,  and  to  be  succeeded  by  eternal  happiness  after  death  ? 

2.  Each  speaker  shall  be  entitled  to  an  alternate  address 
of  thirty  minutes,  and  no  longer,  unless  the  other  party  waive 
his  right. 

3.  The  discussion  shall  be  moderated  by  three  men,  each 
of  the  parties  choosing  one,  and  these  two  a  third,  who  sijall 
be  considered  the  President  of  the  Bench. 

4.  The  discussion  shall  (God  willing,)  commence  on  the 

inst.  at  the  Church,  at  halt"  past  9  oVlock,  A. 

M-  and  continue,  if  necessary  uiml  jkx  n.  It  shall,  if  neces- 
sary, be  resumed  at  4,  and  continuen  imtil  half  alter  (i,  and  so 
©n  from  day  to  day  until  both  parties  are  satisded. 

5.  The  debate  shall  be  opened  and  closed  by  one  party  in 
the  forenoon  and  anoiber  in  the  afternoon  And  in  case  of 
a  continuance,  the  party  who  relinqui.shed  thi!»  privilege  oa 
the  morning  of  the  first  da\,  shall,  if  requiring  it,  eujoy  it  oa 
the  morning  of  the  second  ;  and  so  on. 

The  only  difficulty  likely  to  occur  in  the  consideration  of 
the  above  rules  is  in  the  tirst  of  them,  which  settles  the  sub- 
ject of  discussion.  In  your  letter  you  propose  a  question 
for  debate,  without  which  you  say  "  we  should  have  no  occa- 
sion to  discuss  either  the  nature  or  the  duration  of  punish- 
ment.*' To  this  1  answer  that  the  duration  of  punishnu  nt  is 
the  very  point  in  question  between  us,  aud  the  only  one  on 

B 


which  1  am  wiUinj!^  to  meet  vou  :  and  of  course  I  should  not 
wish  to  turn  my  attention  to  one  which  would  exclude  it. 
This  is  the  very  feature  which  distinguishes  the  Universalists 
from  other  sects.  And  remember.  Sir,  that  you  are  called  a 
Universalist  preacher,  your  book  is  on  universal  benevolence, 
and  it  was  addressed  to  the  Universalist  church.  The  fact 
that  this  book  treats  principally  on  the  duration  of  punish- 
ment,  was  the  reason  of  its  invitation  being-  accepted.  If  it 
should  now  be  postponed  for  another,  you  may  afterward  in- 
troduce another  and  another  without  end.  Some  would  sus- 
pect this  to  be  a  plan  of  procuring  an  indefinite  postpone- 
ment of  a  question  which  you  profess  a  great  willingness  to 
discuss. 

But  let  us  see  whether  you  have  not  done  injustice  to  your 
own  question.  Without  its  accompanying  explanation  it 
reads  as  follows;  viz.  "  Does  the  law  of  God  require  that  sin 
committed  here  in  time,  and  in  this  state  of  mortality  should 
be  punished  in  eternitv  or  beyond  death?"  This  is  a  question 
about  eternal  punishment;  and  how  you  could  investigate  it, 
and  at  the  same  time  "  have  no  occasion  to  discuss  either  the 
nature  or  the  duration  of  punishment,"  I  am  at  a  loss  to  know. 
The  duration  of  punishment  is  the  very  jet  of  the  question, 
and  I  would  freely  undertake  to  discuss  it,  were  it  not  for  the 
very  reason  which  (as  some  would  suspect)  induced  you  to 
propose  it'  That  reason  is,  that  this  question  is  an  attempt 
to  preclude  me  from  the  benefit  of  all  but  one  argument,  and 
that  thought  to  be  the  weakest  one  of  many  arguments  by 
which  our  opinion  is  supported.  You  would  not  permit  m© 
to  confine  you  to  one  argument  any  more  than  to  one  text, 
and  a  persevering  attempt  to  do  either  would  be  easily  un- 
derstood by  those  friends  who  have  so  long  admired  your  po- 
lemical prowess. 

The  question  as  stated  in  the  above  rules  does  justice  to 
you  and  myself.  It  trammels  neither,  but  leaves  each  at  li- 
berty to  manage  his  cause  in  his  own  way.  it  is  hoped,  there- 
fore, that  there  will  be  no  farther  difficulty  about  the  investi- 
gation of  questions  confessedly  irrelevant  to  the  subject ;  es- 
pecially as  the  discussion  of  such  questions  was  never  made  a 
pre-requisite  to  your  former  debates  with  either  laymen  or 
clergymen. 

As  the  young  men*s  Missionary  Society  have  sent  me  an 
appointment  which  may  soon  be  accepted,  it  is  but  right  to 
inform  you  that  this  correspondence  was  undertaken  on  my 


XI. 

i>wn  motion,  after  asking  counsel  of  God,  and  of  course,  is 
nut  to  be  considered  as  attaching  any  responsibility  to  the 
Missionary  Society  or  to  the  Clergy  of  the  city. 

W.  L  MCALLA. 
Philadelphia^  69  North  Third-st.     July  8, 1824, 
Mr.  Abner  Kneeland. 


No.  5. 
Mr.  Calla, 

Yours  of  this  morning,  proposing  a  conference,  or  public 
debate,  has  been  received,  and  now  lays  before  me.  I  hereby 
accept  your  proposals,  and  agree  to  the  arrangement,  with  the 
exception  of  a  single  word  in  the  first  proposition,  a  word  en- 
tirely unnecessary  on  your  pan,  and  which  involves  a  main 
question  with  me.  I  mean  the  word  "  future"  in  connection 
with  punishment.  The  reason  why  I  wish  to  exclude  this 
word  from  the  proposition,  may  be  obvious:  the  terms  "  future 
punishment"  are  so  generally  understood  to  mean  a  punish- 
ment in  another  world;  it  would  seem  that  I  had  admitted  the 
fact  of  the  existence  of  such  punishment,  by  agreeing  to  dis- 
cuss its  duration,  a  doctrine  which  but  few  Universalists  be- 
lieve, and  which  is  not  contained  (but  proofs  to  the  contrary 
are  contained)  in  my  Lectures.  You  must  be  sensible,  sir, 
that  it  will  be  altogether  nugatory  to  talk  about  the  duration 
of  punishment  in  another  world,  until  we  have  good  evidence 
that  such  punishment  either  does,  or  will,  at  some  future  pe- 
riod, exist.  I  do  not  deny  you  the  use  of  any  evidence,  or  any 
arguments  which  go  to  establish  this  fact;  but  unless,  sir,  you 
are  prepared  to  prove  this,  namely,  the  certainty  of  punish- 
ment in  another  world,  that  is,  in  another  state  of  existence, 
you  must,  I  think,  be  sensible  that  you  cannot  prove  that  pun- 
ishment is  '*  absolutely  eternal." 

In  order  to  fix  on  time  and  place,  and  make  such  other  ar- 
rangements as  may  be  n»?cessary,  have  the  goodness  to  call  on 
me  this  afternoon  at  5  o'clock,  or  as  soon  as  convenient. 

A.  KNEELAND. 

Thursday,  3  o^dock,  P.  M. 


No.  6. 
The  Rules  of  Conference  adopted  and  signed  by  the  parties 
may  be  seen  in  No.  If),  where  they  are  introduced  by  a  Uni- 
versalist  preamble,  which,  though  written  over  my  name,  was 
no  more  my  own  production  than  the  speeches  which  Mr. 
Jennings  has  attributed  to  me. 


%ii 


No.  7. 


PROM  THE  DKMOCR\TIC    PRESS  OF    JULY  20;  1824. 

We  had  not  intended  to  have  taken  any  notice  of  the  late 
Theological  Controversy  which  took  place  in  this  city,  but  a 
friend  having  taken  the  trouble  to  prepare  the  following  M'e  do 
not  feel  at  liberty  to  set  it  aside,  whatever  may  be  our  unwilling- 
ness or  reluc'ance  to  publish  any  thing  which  may  savour  of 
religious  disputatiion  or  sectional  prejudices. 

Fon  THX   DEMOCBATIC  PHES&. 

M'CALLA  vs.  KNEELAND. 

"  If  I  am  light,  thy  grace  impart. 

Still  in  the  right  to  stay  ; 
If  I  am  wrong,  <  >  teach  my  heart. 

To  find  that  better  way." 

Mr.  Editor.— 

The  dispute  between  the  above  named  gentlemen  which  con- 
tinued for  four  days,  which  was  concluded  this  evening,  Friday;  I 
presume  is  no  news  to  you.  To  give  some  account  of  this  strange 
controversy,  or  I  should  more  properly  call  it  this  novel  mode  of 
conducting  a  religious  controversy,  I  devoted  a  few  minutes  af- 
ter retiring  from  the  scene  of  action,  (the  Universalist  Church 
in  Lombard  street)  hoping  that  it  may  be  agreeable  to  your  read- 
ers botii  in  "  town  and  country"  to  know  something  about  this 
spirit  >tirring  affair  which  has  brought  both  ends  of  our  town  to- 
gether, day  after  day,  since  the  discussion  commenced. 

The  subject  of  debate  between  the  Rev.  Mr.  M'Calla  of  the 
Presbyterian  persuasion,  from  Kentucky,  and  the  Rev  Mr. 
Kneeland,  Universalist,  of  this  city,  was  whether  there  is,  or  is 
not,  a  "  State  of  Future  and  Eternal  Punishment,'^ 

The  mode  of  dividing  the  time  between  the  speakers  had  been 
previously  agreed  on;  each  was  to  have  half  an  hour  alteriiately, 
until  the  disputants  or  subject  was  exhausted.  The  debate  be- 
gan, and  was  continued,  with  all  the  earnestness,  learning  and 
zeal  of  the  opponents.  Every  text,  or  perhaps  nearly  every 
text,  was  cited  for  or  against,  which  is  to  be  found  in  the  inspir- 
ed volume,  and  commented  on  in  some  shape  or  other.  I  think 
it  proper  not  to  say  fully  discussed,  for  it  was  declared  this 
morning  that  the  Church  would  be  closed  after  to-day,  and  Mr. 
M'Calla  had  not,  nor  could  not,  get  through  his  argument  as  he 
had  originally  intended  to  pursue  it  He  however  abridged  his 
eoinnients  in  order  to  finish  in  the  required  time.  In  the  course 
of  this  long  debate  there  certainly  was  a  handsome  display  of 
Biblical  erudition  on  both  sides,  as  well  as  good  logical  argu- 
ment; but  in  the  early  part  of  the  dispute  there  was  one  illiberal 
taunt  against  the  *'  raw  backwoods  Kentuckiau  to  undertake  to 


XIU 

fi^acli  theology  in  Pluladelpnia"  which  caused  considerate  as- 
pciitv  in  replV,  and  was  not  forgotten  through  the  whole  deba'^e. 
The  Kentuckian  not  only  proved  himself  a  zealous  servant  of 
his  Master,  a  good  theologian  and  an  able  debater,  but  also  a 
qood  Greek,  Hebrew  and  Latin  scholar,  and  well  read  in  the 
fathers  of  the  Church. 

At  half  past  six  o'clock  on  Friday  evening  the  contest  closed. 
Mr.  ICneeland  reiterated  many  of  his  favourite  texts,  made  a 
last  and  powerful  appeal  for  the  reason,  plausibility  and  mercy 
of  his  doctrine,  and  concluded  by  insisting  that  his  construction 
of  Divine  Law  was  the  true  and  catholic  gospel  of  Christ.  Mr. 
M'-Calla  had  ttie  last  half  hour,  and  concluded  the  debate  by  a 
concise  recapitulation  of  some  of  his  strongest  proofs  in  support 
of  his  opinions.  His  peroration  was  really  excellent,  solemn 
and  impressive;  his  reasoning  was  sound  and  irrefutable.  A 
description  I  cannot  attempt;  the  whole  will  be  printed  I  pre- 
sume, but  the  reader  will  nor,  nay,  I  had  almost  said,  cannot, 
have  an  adequate  idea  of  the  intense  zeal  and  fervour  of  the 
speaker,  to  instill  into  every  mind  the  blessed  truth. 

The  disputants  shook  hands  and  separated  with  perfect  good 
will  towards  each  other  as  men,  though  as  widely  differing  as 
Christians  as  when  they  first  met.  The  immense  crowd  of  spec- 
tators also  separated  in  a  very  peaceable  quiet  manner. 


No.  8. 

Panl  was  answered  by  a  Vestryman  who  denied  that  I 
had  bcpn  excluded  from  the  church.  In  the  Democratic 
Press  of  July  24th,  he  replies;  after  which  Mr.  Rneeland, 
in  the  same  paper,  of  the  27th,  confirms  the  account  of  the 
Vestryman. 

FROM  THE  DEMOCRATIC   PRESS,   JULY  24. 

M'CALLA  AND  KNEELAND  ONCE  MORE. 

Mr.  Editor — You  will  confer  a  favour  by  inserting  the  follow- 
ing brief  reply  to  "  A  Member  of  the  Vestry,"  and  you  may  rest 
assured  that  I  shall  not  trouble  you  again  on  this  subject. 

The  following  sentence  which  I  still  aver  to  be  substantially 
true,  is  roundly  pronounced /a/se  by  the  vestry  man; — '-It  was 
declared  this  morning  [meaning  Friday  morning,]  that  the 
church  would  be  closed  after  to-day,  and  Mr.  M'Callahad  not, 
nor  could  not,  get  through  his  argument,  as  he  had  originally  in- 
tended to  pursue  it."  Now  I  say  words  were  never  plainer 
spoken  than  these  were  by  Mr.  Kneeland,  that  "this  house 
(meaning  the  Universalist  Church,)  could  not  be  promised  after 


XIV 

to-day,  (Friday  last)  lor  the  purpose  ot" continuing  this  debate.'-' 
Yet  it  is  said  no  such  declaration  was  made  !  and  still  it  is  ad- 
mitted, Mr.  M'Calla  "  tried  to  insinuate  that  such  had  been  the 
fact.^^  Those  who  heard  this  controversy  know  full  well  that  Mr. 
M'Calla  did  not  indulge  in  insinuation  in  this  instance,  but  plain- 
ly regretted  that  his  time  had  been,  contrary  to  agreement, 
prescribed.  It  is  true  when  Mr.  Kneeland  replied  to  the  re- 
grets of  his  opponent,  he  did  say,  for  ought  he  knew  the  church 
could  be  obtained  for  a  month,  if  required  so  long:  '■^  but  that  it 
did  not  belong  to  him,  he  had  no  control  over  it,^^  and  it  did 
not  suit  a  "  A  member  of  the  Vestry,"  at  that  time  to  say  any 
thing  about  it,  therefore  it  must  be  closed  as  before  stated,  and 
it  was  closed  accordingly. 

No  person  will,  I  presume,  have  hardihood  enough  to  deny 
that  Abner  Kneeland  had  not  the  same  control  over  the  church 
he  had  when  the  Bules  of  Conference  were  adopted  and  signed 
by  him  and  his  opponent.  For  the  sake  of  illustrating  the  good 
faith  of  Mr.  M'Calla's  opponent  I  just  copy  the  4th  and  6th  ar- 
ticles of  conference,  viz: 

4th  The  Discussion  shall,  God  willing  commence  on  the  IStii 
inst.  at  half  past  9  o'clock  A.  M.  and  continue  if  necessary,  un- 
until  noon.  It  shall  be  resumed  if  necessary  at  4  o'clock,  and 
continue  until  half  past  6,  P.  M.  and  continue  from  day  to  day 
until  both  parties  shall  be  satisfied. 

6th  The  conference  to  be  held  at  the  Universalist  Church  in- 
Lombard-st.  and  adjourned  by  mutual  consent  to  some  other  suit- 
able place. 

1  hus  we  perceive  instead  of  an  adjournment  by  mutual  con- 
sent, the  adjournment  take  place  no/enst;o/ens,  without  any  con- 
sultation about  it.  After  this  it  is  to  be  hoped  those  "  Challen- 
ges for  disputation  to  the  learned  clergy,  the  more  learned  the 
better,  of  more  than  20  years  standing,"  will  be  withdrawn. 

The  vestry  man  says,  "  No  declaration,  therefore  was  made  on 
either  side,  except  what  was  made  by  Mr.  Kneeland  and  Mr. 
M'Calla."  No  one  ever  said  there  was.  Mr.  Kneeland  and 
Mr.  M'Calla  are  the  only  persons  the  public  know  any  thing 
about,  they  have  said  all,  and  done  all  that  has  been  said  or  done, 
in  this  affair;  so  he,  very  unwittingly  concedes  all  he  had  just 
been  stoutly  denying.  In  his  N.  B.  he  requests  that  public 
opinion  mav  be  suspended  on  the  merits  of  the  discussion.  The 
merits  of  the  discussion  are  to  prove  or  disprove  a  state  of  future 
and  eternal  punishment^  and  in  my  humble  opinion  to  those  who 
read  their  Bibles,  and  have  or  even  have  not  heard  the  debate 
cannot  be  thought  to  judge  prematurely  on  a  matter  so  plain  to 
all  but  those  who  are  detertimed  to  pvt  off  the  law  of  god. 

PAUL. 


XV 


No.  9. 

The  following   Letters  passed  between   Mr.  M'-Calla  and  Mr. 
Kneeland  after  the  close  of  the  foregoing  Discussion: 

Mr.  Kneeland, 

In  the  *' Democratic  Press"  I  observe  a  dispute  between 
"  Paul"  on  one  side,  and  you  and  "  A  Vestryman"  on  the 
other  side,  whether  or  not  I  was  brought  to  a  premature  close,  in 
the  discussion  in  Lombard -street  Church.  Your  arguments  and 
statements  I  deem  incorrect.  Yet  one  feature  of  your  publica- 
tion gives  me  pleasure.  It  is  an  indication  of  a  willingness  on 
your  part  to  hear  me  until  I  am  satisfied.  You  have,  now,  at 
least,  given  me  "  to  understand,  that  in  all  probability,  the  house 
might  be  abtained  as  long  as  it  shtnild  be  wanted."  Another 
meeting  would  give  you  an  opportunity  of  answering  that  new 
matter  to  which  you  made  no  reply,  and  it  would  show  whether 
my  materials  were  exhausted  or  not.  This  would  be  suitable  on 
another  account:  your  challange  which  was  accepted  in  my  let- 
ter of  the  2d  inst.  "invites  and  intreats  the  clergy"  *'  to  dis- 
cuss'' not  only  one  error,  but  '-the  supposed  errors''^  of  your 
Lectures.  During  the  debate  I  showed  that  they  erred  on  the 
Divinity  of  Christ,  and  intimated  a  willingness  to  meet  you  at  a 
convenient  season  on  that  point.  That  intimation  is  now  re- 
newed. If  you  still  entertain  the  desire  manifested  in  your  re- 
peated challenges,  it  can  now  (God  willing)  be  gratified  at  the 
same  place,  with  the  same  rules,  and  under  the  same  moderation; 

Your  speedy  answer  will  be  a  gratification  to 

W.  L.  MCALLA. 
Philadelphia,  July  31,  1824. 

No.  69  North  Third  Street. 


Mr.  M'Calla, 

As  our  former  letters  are  published  in  the  "  Gazetteer,'^ 
and  the  subsequent  discussion  is  now  in  the  Press,  I  shall  pub- 
lish, through  the  same  medium,  yours  of  the  31st  ult  together 
with  this  my  reply. 

You  say  that  you  deem  my  "  arguments  and  statements"  to 
be  "incorrect;"  but  you  have  not  informed  me  to  what  argu- 
ments you  allude,  nor  wherein  my  statements  have  been  incor- 
rect. This  is  reprehensible.  No  man  ought  to  be  charged 
with  having  made  incorrect  statements,  without  being  informed, 
at  the  same  time,  wherein. 

Although  I  had  pledged  myself,  and  was  determined  to  hear 
you  through  at  that  time,  yet  I  have  given  no  pledge  to  meet  you. 
again  in  the  same  way;  and  whether  I  do,  must  depend  on  cir- 


xvi 

cumstances  which  are  first  to  be  considered. — As  the  Cliurch  iit 
Lombard  street,  in  which  we  held  our  late  discusson,  ijas  been 
since,  (at  considerable  expense,)  both  cleaned  and  repaired,  I  am 
not  able  to  say  whether  it  could  be  so  soon  obtained  again  for  a 
similar  purpose. 

As  to  the  new  matter  to  which  I  had  not  an  opportunity  to  re- 
ply, (Ps.  ix.  5.)  since  it  makes  nothing  in  your  favour,  nor 
against  any  of  my  arguments,  a  bare  note  of  a  very  few  lines,  will 
be  all  the  reply  I  shall  need. 

Whether  your  materials  were  all  exhausted  or  not,  is  a  mat- 
ter of  no  consequence;  for  if  you  could  s\>end  four  days  without 
the  least  attempt  to  reply  to  either  my  tirst  or  second  argument, 
both  of  which  were  presented  in  my  iiist  speech,  (to  neither  of 
which  did  you  attenipt  any  reply,)  you  probably  might  continue 
a  month  in  the  same  way;  and,  after  all,  lo  no  purpose. 

If  you  wish  to  discuss  the  '•  supposed  errors"  of  my  Lectures, 
you  must  do  it  in  the  way  the  challenge  (as  you  call  it)  was  given, 
namely,  through  the  medium  of  the  press;  for,  as  those  Lectures 
have  been  so  long  before  the  public,  I  shall  discuss  that  subject 
in  no  other  way:  nor,  unless  you  are  able  to  point  out  errors 
which  are  material  and  important  in  point  of  doctrine  or  fact,  do 
I  pledge  myself  to  reply.  You  have  said  that  there  were  errors 
in  my  l^ectures,  but  you  have  not  yet  shown  any.  I  did  not 
think  proper  to  contradict  what  you  was  pleased  to  say  about 
them  during  the  discussion,  (except  when  you  tried  to  pervert  a 
single  sentence,)  and  it  was  for  this  plain  reason, — because  they 
were  not  mentioned  in  the  proposition  for  discussion. 

Now ,  sir,  I  wish  you  distinctly  to  understand,  notwithstand- 
ing whatever  you  may  say  about  challenges,  that  before  I  will  con- 
sent to  debate  with  a  man  on  any  religious  subject  whatever,  at 
any  time  or  place,  who  has  not  only  refused  to  unite  with  me  in 
religious  woiship.,  but  wiio  has  refused  to  give  me  his  hand  when 
mine  was  extended  to  him  in  token  ot  friendship,  in  my  own  desk, 
he  must  give  me  satisfactory  evidence  that  the  clergy  with  whoia 
he  is  connected,  and  with  whom  he  professes  to  be  in  fellowship, 
however  much  they  may  disapprove  of  his  conduct  in  this  parti- 
cular, nevertheless  consider  him  as  a  brother  in  the  faith,  and 
approve  of  his  mode  of  arguing  on  religious  subjects.  This, 
with  me,  is  a  sine  qua  non^  and  unless  it  be  complied  with,  it. 
will  be  useless  to  urge  any  thing  further  on  the  subject. 

If  1  meet  a  man  to  discuss  religious  subjects  before  the  pub- 
lic, I  must  meet  him  on  the  level; — !»e  is  not  to  have  the  privilege 
of  assuming  that  he  is  a  christian,  and  that  his  antagonist  is  an 
infidel,  until  he  has  proved,  both  from  theory  and  practice ,  that 
such  is  the  fact. — 1  ask,  in  this  case,  no  more  than  what  I  am 
willing  to  give,  should  it  be  required. — Or,  let  your  friends 
open  the  dgors  of  one  of  their  Churches,  to  accommodate  the  au- 


XVll 

dience,  as  mine  have  done,  and  I  will  consider  it  a  satisfactory 
evidence  that  they  are  with  you  in  this  debate. 

These  preliminaries  being  settled,  the  first  thing  in  order  to 
be  attended  to,  is,  what  has  been  already  proposed. 

1.  You  must  show  the  law  of  God  which  requires  '*  absolutely 
eternal  punishment,"  or  else  acknowledge  that  no  such  law  has 
been  given  to  man. 

2.  You  must  show  that  God  has  threatened  man,  through  the 
medium  of  his  prophets,  with  a  punishment  which  is  *'  absolute- 
ly eternal,"  or  else  acknowledge  that  you  cannot. 

3.  You  must  prove,  from  the  New  Testament,  that  there  will 
be  the  wicked^  (Ps.  xxxvii.  10,)  and,  of  course,  a  punishment 
for  the  wicked,  after  this  mortal  shall  have  put  on  immortality, 
or  after  that  death  is  swallowed  up  of  life,  or  acknowledge  that 
you  cannot. 

4.  No  evidence  will  be  admitted  as  a  proof  of  a  punishment 
between  death  and  the  resurrection,  that  is,  in  what  is  called  an 
intermediate  state,  unless  you  can  first  prove  that  the  soul  or 
spirit  of  man  (whatever  you  may  understand  by  those  terms)  is 
susceptible  of  consciousness,  and  of  course,  of  happiness  or  mis- 
ery, independent  of  the  organs  of  sense,  or  seperate  from  a  body. 

5.  I,  on  my  part,  will  prove  the  latter  part  of  our  former 
proposition  true,  and  that  all  mankind  will  ultimately  be  saved 
from  sin,  and  consequently  from  punishment,  or  else  acknow- 
ledge that  I  cannot. 

6.  It  shall  be  mutually  agreed,  that  the  moment  either  wan- 
ders from  the  point  in  debate,  in  the  opinion  of  either  two  of  the 
moderators,  he  shall  be  stopped;  and  unless  he  will  confine 
himself  to  the  subject,  in  proper  and  decorous  language,  he 
shall  not  be  allowed  to  proceed. 

7.  The  moderators  to  be  the  same  as  on  the  last  day  of  our 
former  discussion,  or  such  as  may  be  mutually  agreed  upon. 

With  these  regulations,  and  as  many  of  the  former  as  are  not 
inconsistent  with  these,  I  should  have  no  objection  to  continue 
the  discussion  till  every  point  is  fully  settled,  if  practicable. 

A.  KNEELAND. 

No.  31,  South  Second  Street, 
August  2.  1824. 


3tVllI 

No.  11. 
In  the  Franklin   Gazette  of  \.ug.  23d,  the  following  fet- 
ter appeared,   which  was  afterward   copied  into   the  Demo- 
cratic Press  of  September  2d. 

DEBATE  ON  UNIVERSALISM. 

FOR  THE  FRANKLIN  GAZETTE. 

TO  MR.   ABNER  KNEELAND. 

Sir;— In  my  letter  of  the  Slst  ultimo,  published  in  the  Ga- 
zette of  Monday,  a  plan  was  proposed  for  bringing  the  dispute 
between  you  and  Paul,  a  writer  in  the  Democratic  Press,  to  a 
speedy  settlement; — for  giving  you  an  opportunity  of  answering 
my  new  matter; — for  securing  to  me  the  stipulated  privi- 
lege of  speaking  until  satisfied; — and  of  discussing  with  you, 
(if  you  thought  proper,)  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  divinity, 
on  which  subject  your  lectures  afford  another  of  those  errors, 
for  the  discussion  of  which  you  have  challenged  the  clerical 
world. 

In  your  answer  of  the  2d  instant,  published  also  by  you  on 
yesterday,  you  intimate  that  it  is  unimportant  whether  I  spoke 
until  satisfied  or  not; — unimportant  that  you  should  answer  the 
new  matter; — and  inadmissable  that  we  should  hold  an  ore  tenis 
investigation  of  the  divinity  of  Christ.  Although  your  printed 
challenge  is  still  standing,  and  your  pulpit  challenges  are  still 
uttered,  you  decline  another  meeting.  Since  the  debate,  you 
have  altered  your  course.  Whether  this  has  arisen  from  a 
change  in  your  views  of  policy  or  of  propriety,  the  public  must 
judge.  Let  it  be  however  distinctly  understood,  that  it  is  not 
the  orthodox  clergy,  but  Mr.  Kneeland,  the  man  of  challenging 
memory,  who  retires  from  investigation.  Whether  your  stenogra- 
phical  squire,  the  ostensible  Editor  of  the  pretended  "Minutes" 
of  the  discussion,  will,  with  your  assistance,  succeed  better 
from  the  press  than  you  have  done  from  the  rostrum,  is  proble- 
matical. 

To  a  second  meeting  you  object  the  expense  of  cleaning  the 
house.  It  was  never  before  graced  with  a  greater  proportion  of 
females  and  respectable  characters. 

But  you  say  that  the  house  has  been  since  repaired,  and,  there- 
fore, although  you  were  willing  to  continue  the  former  debate, 
you  think  a  second  interview  impracticable.  Strange,  that  in  a 
state  of  repair,  a  house  cannot  hold  an  overwhelming  congre- 
gation, as  w§ll  as  when  it  has  be";un  to  give  way !  Until  after 
the  debate  was  closed,  I  did  not  know  that  the  building,  though 
pi'opped  on  the  last  day,  was  ready  to  fall  in  ruins  on  the  audi- 
ence. Notwithstanding  this,  you  have  intimated  to  the  public, 
that  it  might  then  have  been  obtained  longer.     Yet  as  it  has  since 


XIX 


been  repaired,  and  there  is  little  reason  to  expect  that  it  will 
fall,  we  cannot  have  it  again  but  must  procure  another  church. 
Your  insisting  that  I  should  finish  from  the  press  a  discussion 
which  was  begun  in  conference,  shows  that,  you  are  learning  by 
experience.     With  the  help  of  God,  you  shall  be  satisfied  here 

also. 

As  you  are  unwilling  to  have  your  flight  from  the  controversy 
viewed  in  its  real  character,  you  propose  new  terms  of  confer- 
ence. Three  of  your  requisitions  are,  that  I  shall  prove  eter- 
nal punishment  from  the  law,  the  prophets,  and  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Without  by  any  means,  admitting  that  this  is  impracti- 
cable, it  may  be  correctly  observeil  that  no  man  who  believes  m 
the  inspiration  of  Scripture  will  reject  any  doctrine  or  precept, 
merely  because  it  is  not  revealed  by  every  inspired  writer.  A- 
bundant  testimony  from  the  Old  and  New  Testament  was  ad- 
vanced in  the  debate.  Yet,  as  you  arrogate  to  yourself,  though 
a  party,  the  sole  right  of  judging  of  my  evidence;  and  as  you 
have  already  decided  that  the  Old  Testament  gives  no  intimation 
even  of  a  future  state,  this  demand  for  proof  from  that  quarter 
was  only  intended  as  an  insurmountable  obstacle  to  another 

meeting;. 

The  same  general  features  characterize  your  fourth  demand, 
requiring  proof  that  the  soul  can  exist  separate  from  the  body, 
before  you  will  admit  even  the  testimony  of  Moses  and  the  pro- 
phets and  the  apostles,  that  it  does  so  exist;  as  if  infallible  proof 
of  the  fad  itself  did  not  at  once  establish  the  jpossibility  of  the 
fact.  You  might  as  well  say,  that  before  you  will  admit  scriptu- 
ral testimony  of  the  existence  of  God,  this  must  first  be  proved 
from  reason,  independently  of  revelation.  Although  sound  rea- 
son is  entirely  consistent  with  revelation,  none  but  an  infidel 
will  give  it  paramount  authority. 

Our  relative  standing  in  this  businness  may  be  plainly  shown 
by  the  following  supposed  case:  A  Kentucky  duellist,  a  char- 
acter far  too  common,  publishes  a  general  challenge,  and  repeats 
it  often.  Suppose  that  the  last  edition  reads  as  follows:  "He 
once  more  respectfully  invites  and  entreats  the  gentlemen  of 
other  states,  or  some  one  of  them,  the  more  expert  the  better, 
to  exchange  a  few  shots  with  him."  Suppose  that  an  eastern 
merchant,  not  scrupulous  about  the  sixth  commandment,  is  in 
Lexington  on  business,  and  meets  him  on  his  own  premises.  Af- 
ter four  rounds,  the  Kentuckian,  faint  for  the  loss  of  blood, 
gives  a  hint  to  his  antagonist,  that  they  cannot  probably  occupy 
the  ground  any  longer.  They  part,  but  after  the  invitation  is 
again  repeated  and  accepted,  the  Kentuckian  demurs  to  the  for- 
mer regulations,  and  insists  upon  many  new  conditions,  among 
which  the  following  are  four:  1.  The  lock  of  his  antagonist's 
weapon  must  come  from  Europe.    2.  The  stock  must  come  from 


Asia.  S.  The  barrel  must  come  from  Africa.  4.  No  fire- 
arms will  be  admitted  in  this  contest,  unless  you  can  first  prove 
to  my  satisfaction  that  a  man  may  be  killed  at  the  distance  of 
ten  steps,  by  the  use  of  the  ramrod  alone,  independently  of 
powder  and  lead,  and  separate  from  the  pistol.  On  hearing 
these  demands,  would  not  the  eastern  gentleman  conclude  that 
the  backwoodsman  was  not  yet  recovered  from  his  wounds?  He 
would  ask,  why  were  not  these  conditions  considered  necessary 
to  the  first  encounter?  Of  what  importance  is  it  where  the  weap- 
on was  manufactured,  or  how  it  is  compounded,  provided  it  is  a 
lawful  one?  And  why  should  it  then  be  laid  aside  for  something 
else? 

Where  jou  obtained  a  right  to  choose  weapons  for  your  anta- 
gonist as  well  as  yourself,  I  cannot  conceive.  If  it  belong 
to  either  party,  it  is  rather  to  the  one  who  has  accepted,  than  to 
the  one  who  gave  the  challenge.  Although  analogy  would  de- 
cide that  you  have  forfeited  your  claim  in  my  favor,  I  thank 
God  that  1  neither  desire  nor  need  exclusive  privileges.  They 
cannot  be  secured  to  you  nor  to  me,  by  the  principles  of  propriety, 
nor  by  the  usages  of  theological  polemics.  You  are  at  per- 
fect liberty  to  choose  your  own  position,  and  your  own  manner 
of  defending  it.  If  you  choose,  you  may  again  ride  into  the 
field  on  the  shoulders  of  Dr.  Priestly,  clothed  in  all  the  beau- 
ties of  the  improved  versi<m,  covered  from  head  to  foot  with 
such  arms  and  accoutrements  as  your  many  Latin  versions  and 
Hutter's  Polyglott.  You  may  again  tell  the  people  how  many 
languages  you  can  read,  and  how  many  you  cannot  read,  (alas!) 
for  the  want  of  Lexicons  and  grammars.  While  you  set  your- 
self off  to  the  best  advantage,  you  shall  be  at  perfect  liberty 
again  to  ridicule  my  country,  my  talents,  and  my  pronunciation . 
You  may  also  laugh  again  at  my  poor  little  unbound  book  of 
li(»tes;  while  you  smilingly  shew  to  the  assembly  your  miniature 
7 estament  with  its  new  coat!  You  may  as  before,  wander  from 
the  point  whenever  you  please;  and  have  great  latitude,  in  re- 
petitions, absurdities  and  sarcasms.  You  may  again  try  every 
Eossible  artifice  to  drive  or  to  decoy  me  from  the  question  in  de- 
ate,  and  when  you  have  failed,  you  may  (as  before)  spend  the 
other  half  of  your  time  in  complaining  that  I  have  never  yet 
come  to  the  point  These  things  should  convince  you  that  1  am 
willing  to  accept  your  invitation  on  liberal  principles,  while  you 
are  afraid  to  prosecute  your  own  challenge  without  very  unfair 
advantages. 

Your  letter  informs  me  moreover  that  we  cannot  again  meet 
unless  we  are  on  the  level; — unless  I  prove  my  Christianity; — 
unless  I  am  virtually  re-ordained;— and  unless  I  give  you  the 
rigiit  hand  of  fellowship. 

Since  our  debate  the  duties  on  orthodoxy  appear  to  be  rising. 


XXI 


As  this  policy  is  intended  to  exclude  that  article  from  the  mar- 
ket, the  distinguishing  features  of  your  new  polemical  tarift'  de- 
serve particular  attention. 

1.  You  say,  "If  I  meet  a  man  to  discuss  religious  subjects 
before  the  public,  I  must  meet  him  on  the  levels  Many  are  at 
a  loss  for  your  meaning.  Do  you  mean  that  you  would  more 
easily  find  your  level  among  the  unfledged  disputants  of  your 
little  debating  societies;  or  among  heretical  teachers,  whom  the 
christian  church  has  never  acknowledged  in  any  age?  If  so, 
your  prudence  maybe  commended,  though  not  your  piety.  The 
words  immediately  following  the  above  quotation  seem  rather  to 
contradict  than  explain  it.  They  are  the  following:  "and  he  is 
not  to  have  the  privilege  of  assuming  that  he  is  a  christian,  and 
that  his  antagonist  is  an  infidel,  until  he  has  proved  both  from 
theory  and  practice  that  such  is  the  fact."  To  place  us  upon  a 
levels  then,  in  your  view,  I  must  prove  myself  a  christian  and 
3'ou  an  infidel!  This  absurdity  is  not  surprising  in  a  man  who 
has  labored  hard,  as  you  have,  to  prove  that  Lazarus  in  Abra- 
ham's bosom,  and  the  rich  man  in  torment,  were  on  a  level. 

2,  Whether  you  meant  the  words  last  quoted  as  an  illustra- 
tion of  the  immediately  preceding  context  or  not,  they  require 
me  to  produce  proof  of  my  Christianity  in  doctrine  and  practice. 
But  who  is  to  be  the  judge  in  this  matter.?  As  you  are  not  satis- 
fied with  the  decisions  of  many  congregations  and  judicatories 
of  the  church,  you  would  probably  like,  previous  to  meeting  me 
again,  to  sit  in  judgment  yourself  upon  my  character.  As  you 
have,  in  common  with  other  infidels,  a  great  esteem  for  Dr.  Priest- 
ly's  "learning  and  piety;"  and  as  you  have,  in  your  lectures,  de- 
cidedly expressed  this  sentiment,  and  earnestly  recommended 
his  "History  of  the  Corruptions  of  Christianity"  to  your  read- 
ers; it  is  easy  to  see  that  you  would  pronounce  me  an  impious 
idolater,  and  no  christian.  For  this  we  need  go  no  farther  than  a 
sermon  preached  by  him,  in  the  year  1796,  in  the  church  where 
our  debate  took  place.  For  the  proof  of  its  doctrines  he  refers 
to  tl\e  history  mentioned  above.  In  it  he  would  persuade  us  that 
Christ  is  a  mere  creature,  like  Moses,  or  even  the  idol  Baal,  And 
he  expressly  declares,  that  "it  is  no  less  idolatry  and  impiety  to 
worship  him,"  than  to  worship  them  I  In  speaking  of  the  cor- 
ruptions that  were  left  untouched  at  the  reformation,  he  declares 
"that  the  first  and  the  greatest  of  these  corruptions  is  the  idola- 
trous worship  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  God  equal  to  the  Father."  The 
Father  he  declares  to  be  "the  sole  object  of  religious  worship,  and 
not  Christ,  any  more  than  Moses,  or  any  other  person  or  being 
whatever." 

It  is  not  surprising  that  such  a  man  should  deny  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Scriptures.  In  his  History  of  the  Corruptions  of 
Christianity,    which  you  have   "  earnestly"   recommended  to 


XXll 


your  readers,  he  says,  (and  you  virtually  say  with  him,)  that 
Paul  wrote  "  without  any  particular  inspiration,"  and  that ''  the 
Scriptures  were  written  without  any  particular  inspiration."  To 
be  approved  as  a  christianin  theory,  by  such  men  as  you  and  Dr. 
Priestly,  it  is  necessary,  then,  that  1  should  deny  the  divinity 
and  atonement  of  Christ,  and  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures. 
From  such  theory  it  is  easy  to  tell  what  sort  of  practice  you 
would  demand.  This  subject  may  receive  some  illustration  here- 
after, from  your  publications  and  those  of  your  universalist  co- 
adjutor, concerning  our  debate.  As,  during  that  contest,  1  per- 
sisted in  quoting  your  lectures,  although  you  were  thoroughly 
ashamed  of  them,  you  must  excuse  me  if  I  now  insist  upon  your 
connexion  with  a  stenographer  of  whom  you  are  as  much  asham- 
ed. That  you  have  reason  to  be  so  shall  hereafter  be  fully  prov- 
ed, if  Providence  permit. 

3.  Yfiu  appear  to  demand  that  I  shall  be  ordained  by  the  bo- 
dy of  the  Presbyterian  clergy  to  the  special  work  of  contending 
with  you,  or  I  shall  not  enjoy  this  enviable  privilege  again.  You 
require  satisfactory  evidence  tl  at  they  consider  me  as  a  broth- 
er in  the  faith,  and  approve  of  my  mode  of  arguing  on  religious 
subjects.  As  the  demand  was  made  only  to  cover  your  retreat, 
the  best  evidence  would  not  be  satisfactory  to  you .  That  I  had 
the  approbation  and  the  prayers  of  all  the  orthodox  of  all  deno- 
minations who  were  present,  is  well  known  to  yourself:  And 
you  well  know  from  my  being  a  member  of  the  last  general  as- 
sembly, that  the  Presbyterians  consider  me  a  brother  in  the  faith. 
Can  you  give  the  evidence  which  you  here  demand  of  me  ?  Do 
you  not  know  that  some  universalists  of  the  Winchester  stamp 
discard  you  as  an  infidel  ?  Did  you  not  know  that  others  of 
your  own  sentiments  lamented  that  you  made  so  lame  a  defence, 
and  wished  that  Mr.  Mitchell  of  New  York,  (except  for  his  ir- 
ritability,) or  Mr.  Ballou  of  Boston,  had  occupied  your  place  in 
the  controversy  ?  If  I  w  ere  afraid,  here  is  a  sine  qua  non  of 
your  own  invention,  under  which  to  take  shelter. 

On  a  former  occasion,  you  made  pathetic  complaints  of  a  pre- 
tended combination  of  the  clergy  against  you.  In  your  debate, 
you  made  what  you  could  of  my  standing  alone;  telling  the  au- 
dience that  I  could  not  find  a  ministerial  second  in  the  city. 
Failing  in  this,  you  resort  now  to  the  old  plan,  and  determine 
on  not  moving  a  step  farther  in  the  business  until  such  a  combi- 
nation is  formed,  in  order  to  increase  your  importance!,  and  add 
pungency  to  your  complaints.  Whenever  you  will  show  satis- 
factory evidence  that  you  have  been  appointed  as  an  approved 
advocate  of  unitarianism  or  infidelity,  by  the  University  of  Cam- 
bridge, or  Transylvania,  or  the  College  of  South  Carolina,  then 
may  you  demand  of  an  antagonist,  special  Presbyterial  or  synod- 
ical  credentials,  and  then  shall  you  nave  them.     But  do  not  ex- 


XXlll 

pect  that  our  ecclesiastical  ocean  is  going  to  rise  in  its  majesty 
*•'  to  waft  a  feather  or  to  drown  a  fly." 

4.  You  object  to  meeting  a  man  who  has  refused  to  join  with  you 
in  religious  worship  ;  and  who  has  refused  to  give  you  his  hand 
in  your  own  desk.  During  the  debate,  we  were  informed  by 
yourself  that  it  was  your  own  desk;  which,  of  course,  induced 
me  to  close  reluctantly  when  you  told  us  that  the  house  could 
not  probably  be  procured  another  day.  Yet  this  was  not  done 
without  repeated  declarations  that  I  could  not  complete  my  de- 
fence in  the  time  allowed  me.  I  am  glad,  however,  that  you 
have  publicly  complained  of  my  refusing  you  my  hand  in  this 
famous  desk  of  yours,  since  it  has  been  incorrectly  reported  by 
one  or  more  of  your  followers  that  I  afterwards  repented  of  this 
act.  Immediately  after  the  debate,  you  requested  me  to  give 
you  my  hand  as  a  man,  since  I  could  not  do  it  as  a  christian. 
As  this  was  only  an  emphatical  way  of  rejecting  your  claims  to 
Christianity,  I  complied;  and  in  doing  so  made  an  express  and 
repeated  denial  of  your  Christianity.  For  refusing  to  give  you 
my  hand,  the  Apostle  John  is  my  precedent,  and  his  disciple, 
Polycarp,  for  my  subsequent  compliance  with  your  request. 
John  rejected  your  unitatarian  ancestor  Cerinthus,  as  "the ene- 
my of  God ;"  and  Polycarp  acknowledged  your  relative  Mar- 
cion,  as  "  the  first  born  of  the  devil." 

But  why  should  the  unqualified  eulogist  of  Dr.  Priestly  be  so 
anxious  to  join  in  worship  with  trinitarians  .'*  This  very  man, 
"  whose  learning  and  piety"  you  so  much  admire,  and  whose 
writings  you  so  ^^  earnestly  recommend"  to  your  I'eaders,  has 
declared  in  your  own  desk  that  "  no  unitarian  can  conscientious- 
ly join  in  worship  with  trinitarians,  since  they  have  not  the 
same  object  of  worship."  He  declares  "that  they  cannot  con- 
scientiously join  in  the  devotions  of  others,  who,  believing  both 
Jesus  Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit  to  be,  each  of  them,  possessed 
of  all  divine  attributes,  as  well  as  the  Father,  make  them,  (as 
to  be  consistent  with  themselves  they  ought  to  do,)  equally  the 
objects  of  their  worship.  This  unitarians  necessarily  consider 
as  idolatry,  as  much  as  the  worship  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  or  any 
other  saints  in  the  Popish  calender."  Why  should  you  wish  to 
worship  with  trinitarians,  when,  with  your  oracle,  the  charitable 
Mr.  Ballou,  you  think  that  you  "  find  them  causing  their  sons 
and  their  daughters  to  pass  through  the  fire  to  a  God  which  is  the 
vanity  of  their  imaginations?"  And  recollect,  sir,  that  notwith- 
standing your  evasions  during  the  debate,  those  lectures  of 
yours,  which  you  are  so  anxious  to  preserve  from  another  castiga- 
tion,  will  ever  fix  upon  you  the  same  sentiments. 

Great  as  your  pretentions  are  to  liberality  and  chatholicism, 
you  there  represent  us  as  the  antichristian  votaries  of  a  God, 
with  whose  character  you  say  that  we  "  associate  all  the  charac- 


XXIV 


ter  of  the  ferocious  Beast^^  of  the  Apocalypse.  To  such  persons 
you  pretend  that  you  are  doing  "  the  greatest  possible  kindness, 
by  pointing  out  to  them  the  cruelty  of  their  god  and  the 
ABOMINATION  OF  ALL  SUCH  WORSHIP."  'I  hcse,  sir,  are  your  own 
words  concerning  the  right  worship  of  the  true  God  by  his  faith- 
ful people.  And  yet,  after  this  licentious  traduction  of  their 
character,  you  pretend  great  solicitude  to  join  with  such  a  peo- 
ple in  such  a  worship  to  such  a  God  ! 

W.  L.  M*CALLA. 
Philadelphia,  August  22,   1824. 

IS'o.  12. 

The  above  letter  received  the  following  notice  in  the  two 
papers,  of  August  27th,  and  September  4th. 

FOR  THK  FRANKLIN  GAZETTE. 

Mr.  Norvell: — I  notice  in  your  paper  of  the  23d  istant,  a 
long  letter  addressed  to  me,  and  signed  ' '  W.  L,  M  'Calla,  "  which 
he  probably  expects  me  to  answer;  but  as  Mr.  M 'Calla  has  not 
complied  with  any  of  the  terms  on  which  it  was  proposed  to  him 
that  the  discussion  between  us  might  be  renewed,  I  have  no  oc- 
casion to  answer  his  long  letter ;  being,  as  I  am,  perfectly  wil- 
ling to  submit  to  the  reasonableness  ot  my  propositions,  and  the 
candor  of  his  rejoinder,  to  a  discerning  and  judicious  public. 

A.  KNEELAND. 
Philadelphia,  August  27",  1824. 


[^COMMUNICATION.] 

Mr.  BiNNs: — I  noticed  in  your  paper  of  Thursday  a  commu- 
nication from  Mr.  W.L.  M  'Calla,  which  had  previously  appeared 
in  the  Franklin  Gazette;  in  answer  to  it,  I  have  only  to  refer  you 
to  the  letters  that  passed  between  Mr.  M'C.  and  myself,  that 
were  published  in  tnat  Gazette  of  the  25d  ultimo,  and  afterwards 
in  your  own  paper;  in  which  it  will  be  perceived,  that  I  have  of- 
fered to  meet  Mr.  M'C.  again  (or  in  other  words,  have  accepted 
his  challenge)  on  condition  that  his  friends  will  open  one  of  their 
churches  to  accommodate  the  audience  (as  proof  that  they  ap- 
prove of  his  manner  of  conducting  an  argument)  together  with 
some  other  conditions  therein  named,  not  one  of  which  has  he 
complied  with.  Until  therefore  he  shall  comply  with  those  con- 
ditions, or  others  equally  fair,  I  have  nothing  more  to  say  to  him 
on  the  subject. 

Respectfully,  A.  KNEELAND. 

Philadelphia,  Sept.  3,  1824. 


No.  18. 
The  Universalist  Maajazine.    of  August  28,  sent  to  me 
from  Boston  contained  the  fuMowing : 

FOR    THE    UNIVERSALIST    MAGAZINE. 

THE  REV.  MR.  M'CALLA. 

The  public  attention  has,  for  some  time,  been  excited  by  the 
movements  of  this  gentleman,  in  Philadelphia.  We  have  seen 
an  account  of  his  challenging  the  Rev.  Mr.  Kneeland  to  a  pub- 
lic debate  on  the  question  whether  the  doctrine  of  endless  mise- 
ry be  true;  of  Mr.  K.neeland's  acceptance;  of  the  debate  which 
was  continued  from  day  to  day,  until  discontinued  by  mutual 
consent.  We  are  further  certified  by  what  Mr.  Kneeland  has 
since  published,  that  neither  he  nor  his  friends  were  in  any  de- 
gree convinced  that  the  doctrine  of  endless  misery  is  a  doctrine 
of  divine  revelation  ;  but  contrary  to  this,  we  understand  that 
it  is  their  opinion  that  the  challenger  was  never  able  to  substan- 
tiate anything  which  is  essential  to  his  doctrine,  nor  refute  a  sin- 
gle proposition  which  is  necessarily  connected  with  the  doctrine 
of  Universal  Salvation.  As  much  as  the  foregoing  is  well  under- 
stood by  many. 

When  I  was  at  Hartford,  Conn,  last  week,  to  attend  the  de- 
dication of  a  new  universalist  meeting  house  in  that  City,  and 
the  installation  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Bisbe,  I  had  the  pleasure  of 
seeing,  among  other  faithful  brethren,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Mitchell, 
from  the  City  of  New  York.  He  showed  me  a  letter  which  he 
had  recently  received,  from  the  Rev.  Mr.  M'Calla,  of  Philadel- 
phia, which  informed  Mr.  Mitchell,  that  Mr.  M-Calla  had  beat* 
en  Mr.  Kneeland  off  from  the  strong  delusion  of  universalism, 
and  that  he  wished  to  wait  on  Mr.  Mitchell  in  New  York  for  the 
purpose  of  publickly  refuting  him,  and  of  convincing  his  con- 
gregation. When  this  letter  was  read  in  Hartford,  I  told  Mr. 
Mitchell  that,  it  confirmed  me  in  the  opinion  to  which  I  was  in- 
clined on  reading  this  clergyman's  challenges,  which  were  ad- 
dressed to  Mr.  Kneeland  in  Philadelphia;  which  was,  that  from 
some  cause,  the  man  was  not  exactly  in  his  right  mind.  I  think 
Mr.  Mitchell  and  others,  of  good  judgment,  agreed  with  me  on 
this  subject. 

The  evening  that  I  arrived  in  Boston,  I  received  the  follow- 
ing letter,  which  sufficiently  corroborates  the  opinion  which  J 
had  before  formed,  of  Mr.  M'Calla's  misfortune. 

LETTER. 

Philaddphia^  jlugust  13,  1824, 
Rev.  Sir, 

I  have  recently  had  a  debate  in  public  with  Rev.  Abner 
Kneeland,  and  as  the  public  generally  have  concluded,  have, 
completely  beaten  my  opponent.  I  am  now  desirous,  sir,  of  hrea;|c*- 


XXVI 

iiig  a  lance  with  jou  upon  some  other  tenet  of  the  Universal- 
ists,  such  as  may  mutually  be  agreed  upon,  and  should  like  to 
commence  the  same  in  some  public  place  in  your  City,  either 
your  house  of  worship  or  some  City  hall  as  soon  as  possible. — 
Will  you,  sir,  favor  me  with  an  early  reply  to  this,  directed  to 
No.  69,  North  Third  street.  For  my  character  as  a  man  of 
learning,  I  refer  you  to  Rev  Dr.  Wilson,  and  Rev.  Dr.  Ely, 
whose  sanction  in  the  present  challenge  has  been  obtained  in 
writing.  W.  L.  M 'CALL A. 

REMARKS. 

The  reason  why  I  publish  this  letter  and  give  the  foregoing  iu- 
formation  is,  by  no  means,  to  injure  Mr.  M'Calla,  but  to  pre- 
vent, what  I  am  very  confident  would  be  attempted,  if  this  pub- 
lic notice  was  not  given;  viz.  insinuations  that  Mr.  Mitchell  of 
New  York,  and  Mr.  Ballou  of  Boston,  have  neither  of  them  con- 
fidence or  courage  to  meet  this  man  in  public  debate,  respecting 
the  doctrine  of  universal  salvation. 

If  Mr.  M'Calla  was  perfectly  sane,  he  would  know,  that  if 
he  had  beaten  Mr.  Kneeland,  ia  such  a  way  as  to  do  any  good, 
Mr.  Kneeland  or  his  friends,  or  both,  would  acknowledge  it;  for 
what  good  does  it  do  to  refute  one  in  error,  unless  he,  by  some 
means,  can  find  it  out  ?  But,  if  he  really  believes  that  he  hai 
convinced  the  Universalists  of  Philadelphia,  that  the  doctrine  of 
endless  punishment  is  a  doctrine  of  divine  revelation;  if  he  had 
his  reason,  would  he  not  know  that  there  is  no  need  of  any  furth- 
er public  dispute,  but  that  to  publish  these  convincing  argu- 
ments, which  hiive  settled  the  gieat  question  in  Philadelphia, 
would  silence  universalism  where  ever  they  should  be  read  £ 
But  he  wishes  to  dispute  with  me  on  some  other  tenet  of  univer- 
salism ',  as  if  after  he  had  disproved  the  doctrine  in  the  gross,  it 
becomes  necessary  to  refute  it  by  taking  its  items  in  detail  I 

But  after  all,  if  I  have  not  judged  correctly,  and  Mr.  M'Cal- 
la is  just  what  he  tliinks  he  is;  and  if  the  Rev.  Doctors,  to  whorai 
he  refers  are  in  earnest  and  acting  understandingly  in  this  mat- 
ter, then  I  would  say,  let  them  accompany  their  champion  te 
Boston  and  stand  by  him  while  he  shall  publicly  refute  the  doc- 
trine of  God's  universal,  impartial  goodness,  and  prove  that  the 
God  of  all  grace  is  unmercifully  cruel,  and  I  will  engage,  when 
all  this  is  done,  to  ^ive  up  my  hope  in  divine  mercy,  and  join 
these  Rev.  divines  in  the  doctrine  of  despair.  But  before  this, 
I  promise  to  use  my  feeble  powers  to  the  utmost  in  defence  of 
the  gospel.  HOSEA  BALLOU. 


xxvii 

No.  14. 
September  the  1  st,  Mr.  Kneeland  published  the  following. 

FROM  THE  FRANKLIN  GAZETTE. 

TO  MR.  HOSEA  BALLOU,  OF  BOSTON. 

Sir. — I  have  just  seen  a  publication  in  "the  Universalist  Ma-- 
gazine"  of  your  city,  for  August  38,  1824,  over  jour  name,  in 
which  you  give  a  letter,  purporting  to  be  from  the  Rev.  W.  L. 
M'Calla.  That  letter  makes  Mr.  M'Calla  say,  "  for  my  cha- 
racter as  a  man  of  learniHg,  I  refer  you  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Wilson 
and  the  Rev  Dr  Ely,  whose  sanction  in  the  present  challenge 
has  been  obtained  in  writing."  I  have  no  question  but  that  you 
received  from  somebody  the  letter  which  you  have  published;  but 
I  am  fully  convinced  that  Mr.  M'Calla  is  a  man  of  sound  mind 
and  unblemished  integrity,  and  that  he  never  wrote,  indited,  or 
addressed  one  line  on  any  subject  to  you,  or  to  Mr.  Mitchell  of 
New  York,  in  his  life.  One  thing  I  can  positively  affirm,  that  he 
never  consulted  me  about  challenging  any  man,  to  any  sort  of 
contest,  nor  did  I  ever  give  any  sanction,  by  writing  or  other- 
wise, to  his  challenging  any  one.  Some  person  has  put  into  the 
pretended  letter  of  Mr.  M'Calla  an  absolute  and  infamous  lie. 

EZRA  STILES  ELY. 

Philadelphia,  August  30,  1824. 

I  suspected  that  the  letters  above  alluded  to  might  be  a  for- 
gery, on  my  first  seeing  the  one  to  Mr.  B.  though  I  am  not  fully 
convinced  that  they  are  so.  What  created  my  suspicion  was 
the  respectful  appellation  "  Reverend,"  prefixed  to  the  names 
of  Mr.  Ballon  and  myself.  I  should  be  able,  however,  to  detect 
the  forgery,  if  it  be  one,  could  I  but  see  the  original  letters.  In 
all  his  correspondence  with  me,  Mr.  M'C.  never  wrote  any 
thin^  more  than  his  name,  which  is  very  peculiar,  and  I  think  I 
should  know  it  among  five  hundred.  He  told  me,  in  the  presence 
of  several  others,  that  he  was  so  nervous  he  could  not  write. 
Dr.  Ely  says,  "  I  am  fully  convinced  that  Mr.  M'Calla  is  a  man 
of  sound  mind  and  unblemished  integrity."  How  could  a  man 
of  sound  mind  denounce  a  discussion  as  being  altogether  spuri- 
ous, to  which  the  testimony  of  hundreds  could  be  obtained  (if  it 
were  necessary)  of  its  being  as  faithful  a  report  as  ever  was 
made;  so  faithful  that  no  one  has  yet  been  able  to  point  out  a  sin- 
gle error  affecting  the  arguments  on  either  side  ?  If  he  were  of 
a  sound  mind,  how  could  he  say  that  he  was  denied  the  privi- 
lege of  the  house  any  longer,  when  Dr.  E.  knows  himself  to  the 
contrary  .="— or,  how  could  he  say  that  I  had  sent  him  the  first 
number  of  the  discussion,  and  requested  him  to  point  out  the  er- 
rors, if  there  were  any,  when  I  had  neither  done  the  one  nor  the 
other  ?  and  when  the  very  number  contained  on  its  cover  a  let- 


txvivL 

ter  from  Mr.  Jennings,  the  Stenographer  and  publisher  of  the 
work,  addressed  tobjth  liim  and  nie,  (as  well  as  to  Dr.  Ely  and 
the  other  Moderators,)  requesting  the  same  thing  which  was  im- 
puted to  me  ?  If  Dr.  Ely  can  reconcile  all  this  with  the  gentle- 
man of  a  sound  mind,  so  be  it. — Then  to  what  motive  will  he  im* 
pute  these  facts,  which  must  stare  him  in  the  face  ? 

A.  KNEEL  AND. 

No.   15. 

PHILADELPHIA. 

WEDNESDAY  EVENING,  Sept.  8,  18Q4. 

TO  EZRA  STILES  ELY,  D.  D. 

Pet^erend  Sir, 

You  are  hereby  respectfully  requested  to  furnish  the  public 
^ith  t'  e  evidence  by  which  you  were  "  fully  convinced  that  Mr. 
M'Callais  a  manof  sound  mind  and  unblemished  integrity,  and 
that  he  never  tvrote,  indited,  or  addressed  one  line  on  any  sub' 
ject  to  [Mr.  Ballou,  of  Boston,]  or  to  Mr.  Mitchell,  of  New 
York,  Ih  his  life."  We  sometimes  ^reswwie  without  any  other 
evidence  than  that  which  the  nature  of  the  case  affords  :  but  to 
presume  is  one  thing,  and  to  he  convinced  is  another,  and  a  very 
diiferent  ihing.  You  might  presume  it,  because,  as  you  say,  the 
letter  to  Mr.  Ballou  contains  "an  absolute  and  infamous  lie  !" 
but  by  what  evidence  were  you  "  convinced"  that  Mr.  M'C.  did 
not  sign  the  letter  which  contains  it  }  He  has  not  disavowed  it 
as  yet,  as  I  can  learn,  and  if  he  had  not  ''addressed"  such  a  let- 
ter, would  he  not  have  been  as  prompt  in  disavowing  it,  as  Dr.  E. 
has  been  in  disavowing  the  lie  it  contains.  Presuming^  there- 
fore, that  you  possess  the  evidence  which  "fully  convinced"  you 
of  the  truth  of  the  statement  contained  in  your  letter  to  Mr. . 
Ballou  of  the  SOth  ultimo,  in  justice  to  Mr.  M'Calla,  as  well  as 
all  concerned,  I  repeat  the  request  that  this  evidence  should  be 
given  to  the  public. 

Your's,  respectfully, 

ABNER  KNEELAND. 

Philadelphia^  Sept.  8,1824. 

To  the  Rev.  EDWARD  MITCHELL,  of  New  York,  and  the 
Rev.  HOSEA  BALLOU,   of  Boston. 
Reverend  Gentlemen^ 

As  the  Rev.  Dr.  Ely  "is  fully  convinced  that  Mr.  M'Cal- 
la never  wrote,  or  addressed"  either  of  you,  "on  any  subject," 
(and  of  course  considers  the  letters  which  you  have  received 
[^bearing  his  name]  a /briery,)  if  you  should  be  convinced,  from 
the  statement  in  the  last  number  of  the  Gazetteer,  that  those 


• 


XXIX 


were  not  signed  by  the  person  whoS6  name  they  bear,  please  to 
publish  the  evidence  by  which  you  are  thus  convinced,  in  the 
Gospel  Herald,  and  Universalist  Magaz,ine.  respec*^ively;  but  if 
the  fact  should  be  otherwise,  and  you  still  suspect  that  tliey  were 
signed  by  Mr.  M'Calla,  be  so  good  as  to  send  the  original  letters, 
enclosed  by  mail,  to  the  Editor  of  the  Gazetteer,  that  the  fact 
concerning  them  may  be  known.  A.  K. 

No.  16. 

FROM  THE  FRANKLIN  GAZETTE,  OF  SePT.  9tH. 

DEBATE  ON  UNIVERSALISM. 

The  Universalist  Magazine  of  August  28,  was  lately  sent  to 
ine  from  Boston,  by  some  one  who  rightly  supposed  that  such  a 
favor  would  be  a  gratification.  It  contains  a  publication  of  Mr. 
Hosea  Ballou  concerning  certain  letters,  purporting  to  have  been 
written  by  me  to  him,  and  to  Mr.  Mitchell  of  New  York.  Of  the 
form,  r  he  has  given  us  a  copy,  and  the  latter  appears  to  have  been 
"  read  in  Hartford,"  Connecticut,  for  the  edification  of  the 
"  faithful  brethren,"  then  encamped  in  that  memorable  city.  As 
it  was  a  challenge  to  a  polemical  encounter,  they  seem,  from  Mr. 
Ballou's  account,  to  have  called  a  council  of  war,  composed  of 
iiimself,  "Mr.  Mitchell,  and  others  of  good  judgment"  in  such 
matters.  The  subject  of  deliberation  was  momentous,  and  much 
depended  upon  the  course  which  they  might  adopt.  To  fight,  or 
not  to  fight;  that  was  the  question.  Mr.  Ballou  was  not  so  pre- 
sumptuous as  to  attempt  doing  perfect  justice  to  the  talents  dis- 
played in  this  illustrious  conclave.  This  work  should  belono-to 
none  but  that  genius,  who  has  celebrated,  in  imperishable  lines, 
the  grand  Universalist  Council  which  met  before  the  fall  of 
Adam.  None  but  Milton  should  attempt  to  say  or  sing  the  wis- 
dom displayed  on  this  important  occasion,  by  thefait/^ul  breth- 
ren, Mr.  Ballou,  "Mr.  Mitchell,  and  others  of  good  judgment," 
in  this  Universalist  Hartford  convention  ! 

For  these  faiUifuls  to  resist  the  daring  assault  of  this  infidel 
invader,  required  much  greater  resources  than  Patrick  Henry 
believed  necessary  to  a  successful  revolt  of  the  colonies.  No 
wonder,  then,  that  these  choice  spirits  did  not,  like  the  Virginia 
senate,  unfurl  the  banners  of  war.  The  lion  of  their  forest  had 
been  bearded  in  his  own  den;  or,  to  speak  more  plainly,  their 
controversial  champion  had  been  publicly  refuted  in  his  "  own 
desk."  After  having  lived  by  challenging  for  many  years,  he 
was  at  last  met  so  successfully  that  he  showed  his  antagonist  the 
door  before  his  argument  was  closed,  and  has  ever  since  refused 
to  meet  him  again.  When  the  man  of  Gath  has  fallen,  who  can 
censure  his  faithful  brethren  of  Askelon  for  turning  their  backs.?^ 


XXXL 

Notwithstanding;  my  indulgent  disposition,  the  council  have, 
through  their  spokessnan,  expressed  an  apprehension  that  I  would 

Publish  uncharitable  ^^insinuations  that  Mr.  Mitchell  uf  New 
'^ork,  and  Mr.  Ballou  of  Boston,  have  neither  of  them  confidence 
or  courage  to  meet  this  man  in  public  debate  respecting^  the  doc- 
trine of  universal  salvation. "  Without,  therefore,  recurring  to 
the  trite  excuse  of  Hudibras  for  their  flight,  they  exerted  all  their 
powers  in  manufacturing  a  feasible  apology.  The  challenge  of 
this  monster  gave  him,  in  their  eyes,  a  distracted  and  hostile 
aspect,  much  more  unequivocal  than  that  of  the  great  wooden 
horse  before  the  walls  of  Troy.  This  did  not  prove  that  he  had 
come  from  the  moon;  but,  in  their  opinion,  such  enmity  to  Uni- 
versalism  proved  that  his  understanding  was  under  the  influence 
of  that  planet. 

Christians  fight  with  spiritual  weapons.  As  Unitarians,  Uni- 
versalists,  and  false  professors  do  not  covet  spiritual  gifts,  they 
have  generally,  and  in  some  cases  successfully,  adopted  the  plan 
of  impeaching  the  intellectual  character  of  those  who  stand  in 
their  way.  This  is  usually  accompanied  with  professions  of 
disinterestedness,  and  often  with  compliments  to  the  moral  ex- 
cellence of  the  intended  victim.  Mr.  Ballou  says,  *' the  reason 
why  I  publish  this  letter,  and  give  the  foregoing  information,  is 
by  no  means  to  injure  Mr.  M'Calla."  Messrs.  Ballou  and 
Kneeland  endeavour  to  deceive  their  neighbours  by  insinuations 
against  my  character,  and  yet  would  be  thought  to  do  me  no  in- 
jury. "  As  a  madman  who  casteth  firebrands,  arrows  and  death, 
so  IS  the  man  that  deceiveth  his  neighbour,  and  saith,  am  I  not 
in  sport.*^"  When  Solomon's  madmen  are  reputed  for  integrity 
and  worth,  their  firebrands  and  arrows  are  calculated  to  produce 
death.  The  reason  why  they  are  often  harmless,  when  coming 
from  such  men  as  that  brace  of  writers  who  have  assailed  me  in 
Boston  and  Philadelphia,  is,  that  in  their  case  such  insinuations 
are  well  known  to  be  the  dernier  resort  of  disappointed  ambition, 
error  and  imbecility. 

Although  the  public  were  correctly  informed  on  the  31st  ul- 
timo, that  I  "  never  wrote,  indited  or  addressed  one  line  on  any 
subject"  to  Mr.  Ballou  of  Boston,  or  to  Mr.  Mitchell  of  New 
York,  in  my  life,  Mr.  Kneeland,  with  this  declaration  before 
him,  republished  Mr.  Ballou's  communication  the  next  day,  and 
accompanied  it  with  approbatory  remarks  of  his  own.  He  con- 
descends to  acknowledge  some  internal  evidence  of  forgery;  but, 
under  a  pretence  of  great  uncertainty,  expresses  a  feeble  wish 
to  "  see  the  original  letters. "  As  they  have  never  yet  saluted 
my  eyes,  I  can  join  him  in  the  wish.  There  is  at  present  strong 
proof  that  their  author  is  the  same  person  to  whom  many  similar 
epistles  have  been  lately  traced  in  this  city.  Let  it  be  distinct- 
ly understood  that  this  person  is  claimed  by  the  Universal  ists. 


Let  Messrs.  Ballou  and  Mitchell  send  his  letters  in  company 
with  a  request  for  his  name.  Some  of  his  letters  were  signed 
with  the  names  of  departed  saints  and  sinners,  male  and  female, 
and  others  with  the  names  of  living  citizens  of  Philadelphia. 
The  following  brief  specimen  is  inserted,  omitting  nothing  but 
the  address  : 

"  Dear  Sir  :  The  following  is  the  best  way  to  get  a  name  to 
live  according  to  the  doctrine  and  Christian  behavour  of  M'Cal- 
la,  the  fire  and  brimstone  chaplain  of  bloody  Jackson. 

Learn  three  mile  prayers  and  half  mile  graces, 
With  well  spread  hands  and  long   wry  faces  ; 
Grunt  up  a  solemn  lengthea'd  groan. 
And  damn  all  parties  but  t;ow  o-w7i. 
I'll  warrant  theu  y'e're  no  deceiver, 
A  steady,  sturdu,  staunch  believer. 

CALVIN,  1824." 
This  universal  letter  writer  was  probably  among  those  who 
thought  that  these  eastern  favorites  would  make  a  better  defence 
of  their  cause  than  Mr.  Kneeland  had  done,  and  therefore  adopt- 
ed a  plan  to  which  he  was  accustomed  for  bringing  us  together- 
He  has  only  elicited  from  them  an  uncalled-for  refusal  to  meet 
me.  So  true  is  it  that  "  the  wicked  fleeth  when  no  man  pursu- 
eth."  Although  when  Providence  calls,  I  am  willing,  in  his 
strength,  to  encounter  a  ranging  bear  or  a  ravening  wolf,  I  am  not 
so  fond  of  knight  eDraiotry  as  to  go  in  search  of  such  adventures. 
If  these  Hartford  worthies  or  any  one  of  them  had  published  in 
my  neighbourhood,  as  Mr.  Kneeland  did,  that  "he  therefore, 
once  more  respectfully  invites  and  entreats  the  clergy  of  othec 
denominations,  or  some  one  of  them,  the  more  learned  the  better, 
to  discuss  this  important  subject  with  him,"  I  should  have  been 
as  willing  to  accept  their  challenge  as  his.  It  would  have  sa- 
voured more  of  a  sound  mind  if  Mr.  Ballou  had  postponed  his 
publication  until  he  could  ascertain  that  I  had  really  sent  him  a 
private  invitation,  or  until  1  had  issued  some  general  challenge 
like  that  of  Mr.  Kneeland.  But  if  1  had  been  madman  enough  to 
blow  such  a  trumpet  of  defiance  as  he  has  done,  1  hope  tnat  I 
should  not,  like  him,  be  so  unsound  as  to  deny  it  afterwards. 

In  the  paper  in  Avhich  Mr.  Kneeland  has  copied  Mr.  Ballou's 
communication,  he  has  also  devoted  more  than  one  whole  page 
to  a  publication  of  Mr.  Morse,  his  moderator  in  our  debate, 
against  tlie  Rev.  J.  M.  for  having  advertised,  as  he  insinuates, 
that  I  would  preach  in  his  chapel  *'  on  Universal  ism."  As  the 
notice  was  given  after  the  debate,  and  in  a  presbyterian  place  of 
worship,  every  one  would  have  expected,  alter  such  a  notice,  to 
hear  a  sermon  against  universalism,  just  as  they  would  expect 
Mr.  Morse  to  preach  against  presbyterianism,  if  they  received 
notice  from  a  universalist  pulpit  that  he  would  preach  on  that 
subject?  and  just  as  Blair's  sermon  07i  intemperance  is  knowB 


xxxu 

by  every  one  to  be  against  tliat  vice.  Yet  this  universalist  graua« 
marian  is  prepared  to  prove  that  nothing  less  than  insincerity  or 
insanity  could  have  induced  Blair,  that  unparallelled  rhetorician, 
to  say  that  he  preached  on  intemperance  when  he  preached 
against  it.  The  privilege  which  Mr.  Morse  has  enjoyed,  in  the 
instructions  of  so  great  a  linguist  and  translator  as  Mr.  Knee- 
land,  may  be  in  some  measure  estimated  by  his  own  words  in  the 
following  extracts  :  viz.  "  When  you  gave  the  notice  of  his 
meeting,  were  you  not  sensible  at  the  time,  that  he  [Mr.  M'Cal- 
la]  intended  preaching  against  universalism,  and  not  on  that 
doctrine;  which  last  expression,  according  to  common  usage, 
necessarily  presupposes  he  did  intend  preaching  in  f avow  of, 
and  not  against,  universalism  ?"  "  Preaching  on  a  doctrine  is 
what  signifies,  agreeably  to  universal  [he  ought  to  have  said 
universalist^  custom,  an  intention  to  advocate  or  endeavor  to 
support  such  doctrine,  whatever  that  doctrine  maybe  !"  These 
extracts  speak  for  themselves.  It  only  remains  for  me  to  re- 
quest Messrs  Ballou,  "  Mitchell  and  others  of  good  judgment,'' 
that  when  they  hold  their  next  inquest  over  subjects  of  delirium, 
they  would  examine  the  intellectual  condition  of  these  faithful 
brethren,  one  of  whom  has  written,  and  the  other  countenanced 
and  published,  such  an  unmerciful  assault  upon  the  English  lan- 
guage and  common  sense.  i     'on- 

Mr.  Kneeland,  apprehensive  of  the  doctcine  of  hjs  universalist 
letter-writer,  founds  his  impeachment  of  my  understanding  upon 
three  new  allegations,  all  of  which  have  no  bearing  at  all,  ex- 
cept against  my  veracity  :  and  if  a  violation  of  truth  will  consti- 
tute a  madman,  our  public  hospitals  must  be  greatly  enlarged, 
or  the  faithf  1(1  brethren  of  good  judgment  will  have  to  build  asy- 
lums for  themselves.  To  prove  tliis  we  need  not  go  one  step 
farther  than  Mr.  Kneeland's  first  interrogative  allegation.  It 
is  as  follows  :  "  How  could  a  man  of  sound  mind  denounce  a 
discussion  as  being  altogether  spurious,  to  which  the  testimony  of 
hundreds  could  be  obtained,  if  it  were  necessary,  of  its  being 
as  faithful  a  report  as  ever  was  made  ;  so  faithful  that  no  one  has 
yet  been  able  to  point  out  a  single  error  aftiecting  the  arguments 
on  either  side  ?''  Mark  the  language  of  Mr.  Kneeland  and  his 
hundreds  of  universalist  witnesses  :  "  As  faithful  a  report  as 
everivas  made.'^  Out  of  the  millions  of  reports  that  ever  were 
made,  these  persons  have  seen  but  a  small  number.  They  must 
be  very  willing  and  well  trained  witnesses,  who  will  swear  t© 
what  they  know  nothing  about.  Although  they  have  never  seen 
many  more  translations  and  grammars  than  reports,  I  have  no 
doubt  that  they  would  be  as  ready  to  swear  that  Mr.  Kneeland's 
is  as  faithful  a  translation  as  ever  was  made,  and  that  Mr.  Morse 
is  as  great  a  grammarian  as  Dr.  Bluir  or  any  other  man  that 
ever  was  made.     Let  it  be  remembered  also,  that  some  reports 


XXX  111 

have  been  correct,  and  this  one,  Mr.  Kneeland  confesses,  is,  in 
the  language,  deficient  in  accuracy.  It  may  be  asked  then,  how 
could  a  man  of  veracity,  or,  to  use  his  own  phraseology,  "  how 
could  a  man  of  sound  mind,"  attest,  as  he  has  done,  that  a  re- 
cord of  a  twenty  hours  debate,  not  written  by  himself,  and  con- 
fessedly inaccurate,  is  "  as  faithful  a  report  as  ever  was  made?" 
I  do  not  inquire  what  judges  and  lawyers  will  say  to  such  testi- 
mony: I  ask  Whatman  on  earth,  but  a  lunatic,  would  believe 
such  a  witness  ?  It  is  no  wonder  that  they  are  rejected  by  our 
courts  of  justice,  for  they  have  not  the  tear  of  God  before  their 
eyes.  But  notwithstanding  the  hundreds  that  he  pretends  would 
come  at  his  bidding,  I  do  not  believe  that  he  can  find  one  wit- 
ness who  will  give  such  testimony,  except  Messrs.  Jennings, 
Kneeland  and  Morse.  As  to  the  latter  character,  we  have  al- 
ready given  his  criticism  upon  an  alledged  notice  of  the  Rev.  J. 
M.  that  I  was  to  preach  "on  Universalism."  This  was  pub- 
lished to  convict  Mr.  M.  of  deception.  What  shall  we  think  of 
the  veracity  of  that  man  who  can  do  this,  after  he  knew  that  it 
was  a  notorious  and  well  attested /ac^  that  on  the  occasion  refer- 
red to,  Mr  M.  did  not  leave  the  people  in  doubt,  but  stated  at 
large  that  1  was  to  "answer  Mr.  Morse's  sermon,  delivered  on 
the  Friday  evening  previous,  in  favour  of  Universal  salvation  ?" 
This  will  appear  by  the  following  certificate. 

"  On  the  sabbath  evening  the  1st  instant  when  John  Magoffin 
notified  the  congregation  at  Union  Chapel,  that  Mr.  M'Calla 
would  preach  there  on  the  following  Thursday  evening,  he  stat- 
ed that  Mr.  M'Calla  would  then  answer  Mr.  Morse's  sermon, 
delivered  on  the  Friday  evening  previous,  in  favour  of  universal 
salvation  ;  and  he  then  stated  some  erroneous  sentiments  taught 
in  his  books  by  Mr.  Kneeland,  such  as  this,  that  God  was  the 
author  of  sin  ;  and  said  that  Mr.  Kneeland  founded  his  sentiment 
of  universal  salvation  on  this  notion  ;  but  he  held  no  book  or  pa- 
per in  his  hand  from  which  he  quoted  nor  did  he  say  that  he  then 
used  Mr.  Kneeland's  own  words. 

Chesnut  Hill,  13th  August,  1824. 

Christopher  Yeakle,  George  Rex. 

Jacob  Lentz  .Jacob  Dutwaler, 

Jacob  Lentz,  Jr.  Henry  Cress, 

William  Smith,  Jacob  Waas, 

Jacob  Cress,  Francis  Markoe. 

The  above  include  the  signatures  of  the  most  respectable  men 

on  Chesnut-hill.,  and  of  a  lay  elder  of  this  city,  well  known  for 

education,  piety  and  good  sense. 

Mr.  Kneeland's  lumping  attestation  of  the  voluminous  report 

of  his  promising   disciple,  who,   it  seems,  has  now  become   an 

Universalist  preacher,  so  abundantly  illustrates  the  texture  of  his. 

F. 


XXXIV 

conscience,  that  I  would  gladly  dispense  with  every  comment 
upon  his  moral  sanity  not  imperiously  called  for  by  his  own  pub- 
lications. These  have  given  to  the  otherwise  insignificant  ques- 
tion, "who  sent  the  challenge?"'  an  adventitious  importance.  If" 
God  has  graciously  enabled  me  to  receive,  profess  and  defend  an 
essential  doctrine  of  Christianity,  I  care  not  much  to  whose  in- 
vitation the  controversy  owes  its  birth.  1  have  said  that  he  gave 
the  first  request  in  his  printed  lectures.  He  considers  this  de- 
claration as  not  only  evidence  of  moral  guilt,  but  it  is  the  second 
of  his  three  new  proofs  of  an  unsound  mind  !  It  is  not  such  des- 
perate idiotisms  as  this  that  have  given  to  the  question  its  artifi- 
cial importance. — It  is  his  publis'^ng  to  the  world  an  acknowl- 
edgement of  the  fa,ct  as  coming  from  me  ;  which  acknowledge- 
ment has  that  identical  evidence  of  forgery,  which  Mr.  Knee- 
land  himself  has  discovered  in  the  lettei-  to  Boston.  This  con- 
duct was  in  my  eye,  when,  in  a  letter  to  him  of  the  22d  ultimo, 
I  promised  a  further  comment  upon  lus  views  of  cliristian  prac- 
tice. A  few  days  before  the  debate,  the  parties,  at  Mr.  Knee- 
land's  house,  agreed  to  a  written  notification  of  the  meeting,  for 
insertion  in  some  public  paper.  As  Mr.  Kneeland  was  acquaint- 
ed with  the  presses  of  the  citv,  our  joint  advertisement  was  left  in 
his  hands.  I  did  not  suppose  that  Universalism  had  so  far  af- 
fected his  understanding  as  to  make  him  alter  such  an  instrument, 
when  exposure  was  the  certain  consequence.  Yet,  without  my 
privity  or  authority,  he  did  add  to  it  the  following  sentence  ; 
viz.  "  This  discussion  was  first  proposed  on  the  part  of  xVlr. 
M'Calla,  and  accepted  by  Mr.  Kneeland."  To  save  me  the 
trouble  of  noticing  this  conduct  in  the  papers,  I  requested  Mr. 
Kneeland  to  correct  his  own  error,  and  inform  the  public  that 
this  declaration  was  added  upon  his  sole  responsibility.  He 
promised  to  do  so.  His  failure  in  the  performance  of  this  pro- 
mise adds  to  the  guilt  of  the  original  transgression. 

Althoujrh  this  article  was  understood  to  be  by  consent,  yet  as 
we  had  ne;  lectsd  to  sign  it,  it  did  not  fnliy  answer  Mr.  Knee- 
land's  purpose.  He  tlierefore  took  our  rules  of  conference,  an 
instrument  which  we  had  signed,  and  this  infatuated  man  delibe- 
rately prefixed  to  them  a  similar  declaration,  in  such  a  manner, 
that  on  the  face  of  the  paj)f  r,  as  published  in  the  Saturday  Even- 
ing Post  of  July  10,  this  manufactured  preamble  of  his  appears 
as  manifestly  to  be  signed  by  me,  as  the  title  of  the  rules,  or  any 
article  which  they  contain.  To  show  this,  we  here  insert  the 
publication  in  its  primitive  beauty,  with  3ir.  Kneeland's  unau- 
thorized introduction,  enclosed  in  brackets. 

"[PUBLIC  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

"  After  the  interchange  of  two  letters  on  each  side,  the  first  of 
which,  dated  July  2d,  coming  from  the  Reverend  Mr.  M'Calla, 


XXX7 

■and  pr()pn'*in|5  a   public    debate  which,   beiii;^  accepted  by  the 
Reverend  Mr.  Svneeland,   led  to  a  meetiuir  ot  the  parties,  when 
the  following  articles  were  nuitually  agreed  upon.3" 
Rules  of  Conference,  adopted  and  signed  this  eighth  day  oj 
\%'2.4.^  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia,  by  ,Sbner  Kneeland  and 
L.    '^I'Calla.     (Duplicates  given  to  the  parties. ) 

1.  The  proposition  for  discussion  shall  be  as  follows,  viz.  Is 
^e  punishment  of  the  wicked  absolutely  eternal  ?  or  is  it  onlj 
a  temporal  punishment  in  this  world,  for  their  good,  and  to  be 
succeeded  by  eternal  happiness  after  death  ? 

2.  Kach  speaker  shall  be  entitled  to  an  alternate  address  of 
thirty  minutes,  unless  the  other  party  waive  his  right. 

3.  The  discussion  to  be  moderated  by  three  men,  each  of  the 
parties  choosing  one,  and  these  two  a  third,  who  shall  be  consi- 
aered  the  president  of  the  bench. 

4.  The  discussion  shall  (God  willing)  commence  on  the  13th 
instant,  at  half  past  nine  o'clock  A.  M.  and  continue,  if  necessa- 
ry, until  noon.  It  shall,  if  necessary,  be  i-esumed  at  four  o'clock, 
and  continue  until  half  past  six  r .  M.  and  continue  from  day  to 
day  until  both  parties  shall  be  satisfied. 

5.  The  debate  shall  be  opened  and  closed  by  one  party  in  the 
forenoon  and  another  in  thei.fternoon,  and  in  case  of  a  continu- 
ance, the  party  who  relinquishes  this  privilege  in  the  morning  of 
the  first  day,  shall,  if  requiring  it,  enjoy  it  on  the  morning  of  the 
second  ;  and  so  on. 

6.  The  conference  to  be  held  at  the  Universalist  Church  in 
Lombard  stre^  t,  and  adjourned  if  necessary  by  mutual  consent 
to  some  other  suitable  place."''  W.   L.    !VI*CALLA, 

ABNER  KNEELAND." 
Without  taking  time  to  dwell  upon  the  features  of  Mr.  Morse's 
grammatical  preceptor  as  reflected  in  the  composition  of  the 
above  preamble,  it  may  be  safely  observed  that  a  man,  who  has, 
without  authority,  written  over  my  rame,  a  declaration  which  is 
no  less  untrue  than  ungrammatical,  is  capable  of  writing  chal- 
lenges in  my  name  to  .\lr.  I^allou  of  Boston,  to  Mr.  Mitchell  of 
New  York,  to  \1r.  Kneeland  of  Philadelphia,  or  to  any  Universa- 
list bedlamite  whose  "  good  judgment''  the  "  faithful  brethren" 
may  celebrate.  W.  L.   M 'CALL A. 

No.   17. 

FROM  THE  FRANKLIN  GAZETTE,  OF  SKPT.  IItH. 

TO  W.  L.  M'CALLA. 

In  yesterday's  paper  I  observed  three  columns  therein  occupi- 
ed with  your  signature  placed  at  the  bottom.  In  that  commu- 
nication,   you   appear  to  be  wrangling,  with   your  accustomed 


XXXV 1 

expertness,  with  at  least  five  different  individuals,  some  of  wliom 
vol!  have  never  yet  seen!  Permit  me  to  ask  you.  sir,  what  all  this 
IS  for?  Is  it  because  you  had  proved  all  or  any  of  them  to  be  dis- 
honest or  unchristian  in  any  thing  whichthey,  or  any  one  of  them, 
have  said  or  done  ?  Or  is  the  whole  of  that  rancorous  spirit 
which  your  communication  breathes  throughout  against  those  in- 
dividuals to  be  attributed  to  your  hatred  of  universalism,  united 
with  your  inordinate  love  of  the  doctrine  of  never-ceasing  dam- 
nation, not  for  yourself,  but  perhaps  for  your  '"father,  brother  or 
wife?"  Is  all  the  litigiousness  with  which  your  writing  is  graced 
to  be  accounted  for  from  your  fond  ness  to  believe  that  that  God  who 
created  all  will  consign  a  part  to  a  quenchless  burning  hell?  Let 
me  ask,  in  my  turn,wiat  shall  i<;e  think  of  that  man  who  can  call  Mr 
Ballou's  acceptance  of  what  he  supposed  at  the  time  was  a  chal- 
lenge from  you  '*an  uncalled  for  refusal  to  meet  me,"  when  Mr, 
Ballou  in  his  rem;^rks  explicitly  says:  "But  before  this,  (i.  e.) 
before  I  join  these  Reverend  divines  in  the  doctrine  of  despair,  I 
promise  to  use  my  feeble  powers  to  the  utmost  in  defence  of  the 
Gospel?"  The  refusal  of  Mr.  Ballou  to  meet  Mr.  M'Calla  is  not 
unlike  what  has  more  than  once  been  called  a  refusal  of  the 
church  in  Lombard -street  to  continue  the  debate,  when  Mr. 
M  'Callaas  well  knew  he  could  have  had  thehouse  longer,as  he  and 
others  knew,  that  the  weapons  used  by  him  against  his  opponent 
were,  before  the  close  of  the  discussion,  becoming  very  few  and 
feeble.  Again,  let  me  ask,  what  shall  we  think  of  that  nian, 
who,  making  Mr.  M  'Calla  his  conservator,  draws  up  a  paper, 
and  after  stating  therein,  designing  to  express  Mr.  Kne»'land's 
sentiments,  "God  was  the  author  of  sin;"  said  that  Mr.  Knee- 
land  founded  his  sentiment  of  universal  salvation  on  this  notion," 
instead  of  saying,  as  he  ought  to  have  said,  in  order  to  be  consist- 
ent with  himself  and  his  former  statement,  Mr.  Kneeland  has 
written  in  a  pamphlet  thus:  "  God  is  the  author  of  sin,  and 
therefore  will  not  punish  it?''  Will  Mr.  Magoffin  be  able  to  get 
the  names  of  ten  respectable  men  attached  to  a  paper,  wherein  it 
shall  be  stated,  that  he  never  used  the  last  quoted  sentence  a& 
coming  from  Mr.  Kneeland,  or  as  exactly  expressive  of  what 
Universalists  believe!  Let  it  be  remembered  by  the  opposers  of 
Universalism  that  "the  way  of  the  trangressor  i*  hard,  'and  that 
no  sinner  has  a  right  to  expect,  that  he  shall  go  unpunished  for 
his  sins.  Let  Mr.  Magoffin  and  the  eininent  philologist  who 
wrote  in  yesterday's  Gazette  turn  their  thoughts  tvithin;  view 
their  studied  policy  in  their  recent  proceedings  in  relation  to 
Universalists,  not  forgetting  the  beautiful  allusions  which  the 
last  has  made  concerning  Hudibras,  the  wooden  horse  of  Troy, 
the  Universalist  bedlamite;  or  they  may  with  equal  propriety 
bear  in  mind  the  conduct  of  any  Presbyterian  bedlamite,  who 
hereafter  wishes  to  employ  Mr.  Al'- Calla  as  a  champion. 

WILLIAM  MORSE. 
Philadelphia^  Sept.  10,  1824. 


"XXXVll 
No.   18. 


FJIOM    THE    FKANKLIN    GAZETTE. 


TO  MR.  ABNER  KNEEL  AND. 

Sir  ;  In  answer  to  your  letter  of  the  8tli  instant,  addressed 
to  rae  on  the  subject  o:  my  note  to  Mr  Ballou,  1  would  state, 
that  I  vvas/wZ/y  convinced  that  Mr.  M'Oalla  never,  at  aiiy  tune 
in  iiis  life,  wrote,  indited,  or  addressed  one  line  on  any  subject, 
to  either  Mr.  Ballou  of  Boston,  or  Mr.  Mitchell  of  JSew  York, 
by  the  simple  declaration  of  Mr.  M'Calla  himself.  His  word 
concerning  any  fact  to  which  he  would  testify,  is  sufficient 
ground  for  confidence  to  all  who  have  any  intimate  acquaint- 
ance with  him.  1  have  been  acquainted  with  him  for  several 
years,  and  could  certify,  were  it  needful,  that  he  is  a  minister 
in  the  Presbyterian  church,  in  good  an<l  regular  standing  with 
his  brethren,  and  highly  esteemed  for  bis  honesty,  eloquence, 
talents,  and  piety,  by  thousands  in  our  ecclesiastical  commu- 
nion, liis  veracity,  so  tar  as  I  know,  was  never  questioned  by 
any  before  he  commenced  a  correspondence  withjou;  and 
since,  none  doubt  il  but  a  tea  who  believe  in  the  universal  sal- 
vation of  mankind.  These  seem  to  me  to  doubt  tiie  veracity  of 
Go(5,  and  to  believe  in  the  veracity  of  "  the  father  of  lies,"  who 
said,  "  ye  shall  not  surely  die  ;"  so  that  it  is  no  wonder  it  they 
should  call  Mr,  M'Calla  "  a  liar." 

The  evideiiice  which  fully  convinced  and  still  cnvinces  me  of 
his  soundness  of  mind,  is  presented  to  me  by  my  ears,  vhcn  I 
hear  him  speak  on  any  subject,  for  he  talks  like  a  man  of  good 
sense  ;  and  by  my  eyes^  when  I  read  any  of  his  writings 

His  debate  with  yourself  convinced  me  that  he  is  '*  a  man 
of  sound  mind,"  and  I  think  came  near  to  convincing  your 
judgment,  sorely  against  your  will,  that  he  is  a  champion  for 
what  the  greater  part  of  the  christian  world  calls  orthodoxy,  of 
extraordinary  polemical  abilities  and  prowess.  If  he  did  not 
conquer  you,  at  least  you  will  admit,  that  a  man  of  no  mean 
powers  of  mind  could  not  put  him  to  flight  in  a  contest  of  lour 
days.  In  short,  by  the  same  kind  of  evidence  which  convinces 
me  that  Mr.  Kneeland  is  not  insane,  but  has  a  sound  under- 
standing, and  other  mental  faculties,  which  1  deem  nearly  as 
much  perverted  as  those  of  Milton's  devil,  I  am  now  convinced 
that  Mr.  M'Calla,  in  native  energy  of  mind,  in  soundness  of 
judgment,  clearness  of  apprehension,  accuracy  of  reasoning, 
rectitude  ot  conscience,  benevolence  of  heart,  and  even  in  the 
kno^v ledge  of  Hebrew  and  Grecian  literature,  is  every  way  Mr. 
Kneeland's  superior. 

Mr.  M'Calla's  letters  to  yourself  since  the  debate  have  not 
failed  to  convince  thousands  who  have  read  them  with  delight, 
that  you  have  no  need  to  desire  a  controvertist  of  sounder  in- 
tellect. EZRA  STILES  ELY. 

Philadelphia,  September  H,  1824. 


KXXVlll 

No.   19. 

FROM    THE    FRANKLIN    GAZETTE,    OK    SliPT.     15. 

TO  MR.   EZR\  SriLES  ELY. 

Sir — If,  inreply  to  your  noteofthe  11th  instant,  I  do  notuse 
all  that  mildness  to  whicli  I  am  accustomed,  and  which  it  is  al- 
ways a  pleasure  to  me  to  observe,  unless  prevented  by  a  sense 
of  justice  to  myself,  you  well  know  the  example  I  follow,  with 
which  you  cannot  be  disj)leascd,  since  it  comes  from  yourself. 

In  answer  to  my  note,  you  say,  "  i  \va^  fully  convinced,  &c." 
This,  sir,  you  informed  the  public  before,  the  truth  of  which  I 
did  not  call  in  (jiiestion;  it  was  therefore  unnecessary  to  repeat 
it:  tie  subject  of  my  inquiry  was  the  evidence  by  which  you  were 
so  convinced,  and  which  you  had  nut  given  to  the  public.  You 
now  say,  '•^  his  [Mr.  M'Calla's]  word  is  sufficient  ground  of 
confidence,  &c."  If,  sir,  the  public  had  been  informed  that 
you  had  the  "^word"  of  Mr.  M'Calla  as  your  authority  for  the 
truth  of  what  you  stated,  and  which  no  one  could  positively 
know  except  Mr.  M'Calla  himself,  1  should  never  have  troubled 
you  on  this  subject.  Or  if  Mr.  M'Calla  had  been  as  prompt 
in  discovering  the  letter  published  by  Mr.  Ballou,as  you  were 
in  disavowing  the  false  statements  which  it  contained  in  rela- 
tion to  yourself  and  Dr.  Wilson,  the  public  would  have  been 
set  right  at  once,  which  would  have  prevented  any  groundless 
suspicions.  Mr.  Ballou,  however,  had  every  reason  to  suppose 
the  letter  genuine,  and  therefore  treated  it  as  such  j  and  I  do  not 
see  how  the  public  could  be  fully  convinced  to  the  contrary,  until 
it  was  discovered  by  the  man  whose  name  it  bears.  I  have  now 
in  my  pctssession  one  of  the  letters  in  question,  and  am  thereby 
fully  convinced  that  no  part  is  in  the  hand-writing  of  Mr. 
M'Calla. 

It  gives  me  pleasure  also  to  find  that  Mr.  M'Calla  stands  so 
high  among  the  clergy  as  a  man  of  "  honesty,  eloquence,  talents 
and  piety  by  thousands  in  our  [Presbyterian]  ecclesiastical  com- 
munion;" for  all  this  adds  weight  to  the  importance  of  the  late 
discussion;  and  I  still  hope  that  nothing  will  occur  to  lessen  him 
in  your  estimation;  but  that  you  will  still  consider  him  "  a  cham- 
pion for  what  the  greater  part  of  the  (Christian  world  calls  ortho- 
doxy." That  he  has  '-'extraordinary  polemical  abilities  and 
prowess,"  I  believe  will  not  be  doubted  by  any  who  heard,  or 
who  shall  read  the  discussion. 

But,  sir,  after  all,  notwithstanding  this  high  opinion  of  your 
friend  Mr.  M'Calla,  you  have  not  had  the  hardihood  to  deny  that 
he  has  made  the  incorrect  statements  with  which  he  is  charged; 
neither  have  you  attempted  to  reconcile  the  making  of  those  erro- 
neous statements  with  the  possession,  at  the  same  time,  of  a  sound 
mind.     He  stated,  during  the  discussion,  that  I  had  written  and 


xixix 

published  a  Greek  Grammar,  which  is  totally  incorrect;  that  he 
Tvas  denied  tlie  use  ot  ihc  church  in  Lombard -street  any  longer, 
which  is  equally  untrue;  w'aicii  statement  he  has  repeated  several 
timessince,  though  it  has  been  as  often  contradicted;  and  he  has 
given  no  evidence  whs.tever  of  its  truth.  He  has  also  stated 
since  the  discussion  that  1  have  refused  to  meet  hiui  a}i,ain;  that  I 
sent  him  the  tirst  number  of  the  minutes  of  the  discussion,  and 
requested  hiu)  to  point  out  the  enors  if  there  were  any;  with 
several  other  statements,  which  I  could  name  if  1  were  disposed 
to  multiply  them,  not  one  of  which  is  correct.  And,  after  all,  I 
am  not  disposed  to  "  call  Mr.  M'Calla  '  a  liar,'  "  th>)ugh  you 
quoted  those  words,  -'a  liar!"  thereby  insinuating  that  he  had 
been  so  called  by  "a  few  who  believe  in  the  "  universal  salva- 
tion of  mankind,"  among  whom  you  undoubtedly  meant  to  in- 
clude mel  Such  insinuations,  without  proof,  more  than  to  saj, 
*'  these  SEEM  to  mc^  *c. "  I  consider  far  beneath  the  dignity  of 
either  the  gentleman  or  the  christian.  It  is  more  charitable  to 
impute  such  intemperate  language  as  that  which  has  been  used 
by  IVIr.  M'Calla,  and  his  vindicator,  to  a  disturbed  imagination, 
•r  a  disordered  brain,  than  it  is  to  say  that  it  proc<  eds  from,  a 
worse  motive.  To  say  that  such  language  proceeds  from  a  mind 
that  is  'sound,"  is  only  to  acknowledge,  in  other  words,  that  it 
comes  from  a  heart  "  desperately  wicked." 

I  challenge  you,  sir,  to  show  the  least  eviderice  that  Univer- 
salists  "  doubt  the  veracity  ot  God!"  And  what  evidence  can  you 
give  why  it  should  so  "  skf.m^^  to  you  other  than  the  evil  surmis- 
in"-sof  your  own  heart  ?  By  what  evidence  does  it  "  sekm  to  you 
that  Uiiiversalists  "  believe  in  the  veracity  of  the  father  of  lies, 
who  said,  '  ye  shall  not  surely  die?'  "  I  know  of  no  Universalist 
but  what  believes  that  Adam  did  die  the  very  death  threatened, 
and  that  too  "  in  the  day"  of  his  transgression.  But  those  who 
believe  that  God  threatened  all  mankind  with  eternal  death,  and 
then  saves  some  of  them  from  it;  what  do  they  but  "doubt  the 
veracity  of  God,"  and  "believe  in  the  veracity  of  the  serpent, 
who  said  to  our  mother  Eve,  who,  no  doubt,  was  one  of  the  elect, 
and  who  now  says  to  all  the  elect,  "ye  shall  not  surely  die?" 
Unless  all  mankind  die  the  death  threatened  as  a  consequence 
of  sin,  how  can  y^ou  vindicate  the  testimony  of  God,  or  prove 
that   the  testimony  of  the  serpent  was  false? 

If  some  of  these  remarks  should  be  rather  "  highly  seasoned,''' 
so  as  to  make  your  "  lips  smack/'*  how  could  you  expect  any 
thing  better  from  "  Milton's  devil?" 

As  to  my  inferiori'y,  in  every  thing  that  is  either  learned,  good 
or  amiable,  to  Mr.  M'Calla,  in  the  opinion  of  one  who  supposes 
my  "  understanding  and  other  mental  faculties"  so  much  "per- 
verted," as  the  writer  of  the  letter  which  I  am  now  answering,  it 

*  See  your  notice  in  tlif  public  papers  of  Atr.  Rrownlee's  work  against  the 
^inkers,  previous  to  its  publication. 


#    xl 


gives  me  no  uneasiness  whatever;  because,  in  the  mind  of  the 
man  with  whom  Mr.  M'Calla  stands  so  very  high,  I  may  be  in- 
ferior, and  jet  not  be  very  low. 

I  am  glad  that  Mr.  M'Calla's  letters  to  me  have  been  read  by 
thousands,"  with  so  much  "delight.''  I  hope  they  will  also  be 


willing  to  read  the  discussion. 


ABNER  KNEELAND. 

Philadelphia^  Sept.  ISth,  1824. 


No.  20. 
There  was  in  the  Democratic  Press  of  Sept.  lOtb,  13th  and 
15th,  a  contest  between  Mr.  Jennings  and  an  anonymous 
writer  by  the  name  of  Justice,  in  which  the  latter  convicted 
the  former  of  corruption  in  hi&  report  of  the  debate.  He  also 
produced  evidence,  both  internal  and  external,  that  the  re- 
port was  under  the  management  oi  Mr.  Kneeland.  Mr.  Jen- 
nings denied  that  the  book  was  written  at  Mr.  Knee!and*s 
house,  but  conjesscd  that  it  was  sold  there,  because  it  was  a 
more  central  situation  than  his  own  !  He  confessed  that  he 
knew  not  even  the  letters  of  the  sacred  languages,  but  denied 
that  Mr.  Kneeland,  or  any  body  else  aided  him  in  writing  his 
critical  notes  on  these  languages,  except  his  "  theologian" 
at  his  "elbow,  which  by  the  bye,  is  a  little  family  dog."  These 
are  his  own  words.  In  the  same  paper,  and  in  the  Franklin 
Gazette,  there  was  a  controversy  between  Mr.  Magoffin  and 
Mr.  Morse,  in  which  the  former  convicted  the  latter  of  false- 
hood in  repeated  instances.  Mr.  Morse  hints  very  strong  sus- 
picions that  his  antagonist  obtained  assistance  from  me  in 
writing.  This  report  which  is  utterly  destitute  of  truth,  he 
appears  to  iiave  invented  as  an  excuse  for  obtaining  such  as- 
sistance himself.  His  first  and  second  pieces  against  Mr. 
Magoffin  could  not  have  been  written  by  the  same  hand,  and 
we  shall  soon  see  that  the  same  remark  is  applicable  to  his 
first  and  second  pieces  against  me  in  Nos.  17  and  24. 

No.  21. 

FROM  THE   DEMOCRATIC  PRESS,   OF  SEPT.  22d. 

DEBATE  ON  UNIVERSA.LISM. 

Just  published  and  now  for  sale,  in  four  numbers,  at  25  cents 
each,  "  Minutes  of  a  Discussion  of  the  Universalist  Question, 
between  Mr.  Abner  Kneeland  and  Dr.  E.  S.  Ely,  conducted  in 
the  Universalist  Synagogue  in  Lombard  street,  Philadelphia, 
July  13  to  17,  1824.  Taken  in  short-hand,  by  R.  L.  Long- 
hand."* 


xli 

This  debate  originated  in  the  following  challenge  of  Mr.  Knee- 
land  to  Dr.  Ely,  as  published  in  the  Franklin  Gazette  of  the  15th 
inst.*  Tiz  :  "I  challenge  you,  Sir,  to  shew,  the  least  evidence 
that  CJniversalists  doubt  the  veracity  of  God,^'  <!tc. 

As  it  is  probable  that  Dr.  Ely,  like  a  petulant  friend  of  his, 
will  say  that  this  is  a  spurious  report,  seein-:  that  the  debate  has 
never  yet  taken  place,  I  would  ask  that  gentleman  what  advan- 
tage there  is  in  waiting,''  Does  he  expect  that  I  could  give  the  public 
a  inor*  faithful  transcript  of  his  language,  sentiments  and  method 
after  hearing  him  than  before?  A  little  experience  would  teach 
him  better.  One  fact  is  better  than  a  thousand  theories;  and  it  is 
a  fact  that  cousin  R.  L.  Short-hand  was  lately  present  at  a  de- 
bate, and  he  has  ascribed  to  one  of  the  parties,  if  my  information 
be  correct,  language  which  he  never  uttered,  and  sentivnents 
which  he  never  believed.  All  that  can  be  asked  of  a  Reporter 
is  that  he  shall  do  justice  to  the  argument;  and  this  can  be  done 
as  well  before  the  debate  as  afterward. 

Mv  opportunities  of  doingjustice  to  Mr.  Kneeland's  argument 
are  peculiarly  happy,  since  every  word  in  this  report  of  mine  is 
copied  from  a  book  lately  published  by  mv  cousin  R.  L  Jennings, 
now  a  Universalist  Preacher.  This  book  Mr.  Kneeland  says  is 
*'  as  faithful  a  report  as  ever  was  made,"  and  will  therefore  en- 
able me  to  shew  '.is  strength  to  great  advantage. 

The  whole  work  is  hereby  "  submitted  to  the  respective  parties 
and  the  moderators  for  their  inspection."  They  are  hereby  re- 
quested to  note  any  errors  that  they  may  observe  "  affecting  the 
argument  on  eitb.er  side."  "  Should  no  errors  be  pointed  out  by 
[them]  notwithstanding  this  request,  it  will  be  considered  an 
acknowledgment  of  the  correctness  ot  the  work,  and  it  will  be 
recommended  to  the  public  accordingly." 

As  I,  in  company  with  my  cousin,  R.  L.  Jennings,  would  be 
glad  of  "  a  more  central  situation  than  my  own  to  dispose  of  the 
work,"  he  would  oblige  me  by  permitting  his  brother  **  who  stays 
at  Mr.  Kneeland's  through  the  day,"  for  the  sale  of  his  books,  to 
sell  mine  also.  Mr.  Kneeland  also  would  confer  a  favour  by 
taking  my  books  through  the  streets  under  his  arm,  along  with 
cousin  R.  L.  Shore-hand's  productions.  By  this,  however,  I 
would  not  have  the  public  to  understand  that  Mr.  Kneeland  has 
any  thing  to  do  in  my  publication.  1  solemnly  declare  upon  the 
veracity  of  a  Universalist  Preacher,  that  1  have  no  connexion 
with  that  gentleman;  no,  not  even  so  far  as  to  have  cousin  R.  L. 
Jennings'  "little  family  dog"  "  at  my  elbow." 

Without  detaining  the  reader  farther  than  to  observe  that  the 
purchase  of  one  number  is  an  engagement  for  the  whole  work,  I 
proceed  now  to  the  discussion. 

No.  1. 

Tuesday,  Forenoon — Dr.  Ely  opened  by  clearing  away  the 
rubbish. 

*  See  No.  19.  P 


xlii 

Mr.  Kneeland.  He  has  his  mind  marked  out  in  a  particular 
track;  for,  having  anticipated,  as  he  supposed,  thegiound  v^  hich 
would  be  occupied  by  his  opponent,  he  had  his  matter  ready  cut 
and  dried  to  meet  him.  Has  he  referred  to  a  single  passage  in 
the  scripture  to  support  his  side  of  the  argument,^ 

Afternoon. — Dr.  Ely  enters  upon  his  proofs. 

Mr.  Kneeland.  He  seems  indeed  to  avoid  the  proposition  alto- 
gether. I  had  expected  he  would  have  brought  forth  his  strong- 
est arguments  in  support  of  his  side  of  the  question,  but  am  sorry 
to  find  he  has  not  produced  a  single  one  relative  to  the  point  in 
discussion. 

No.  2. 

Wednesday,  Forenoon. — Dr.  Ely  advances  in  the  argument. 

Mr.  Kneeland.  Let  him  come  to  the  question,  and  the  mo- 
ment he  can  prove  his  proposition  true,  that  moment  I  give  up 
the  contesi,  and  must  submit.  But  as  he  has  brought  forward 
nothing  for  me  to  answer;  nothing  in  support  of  his  argument;  I 
have  nothing  to  refute.  I  do  not  know  even  how  to  consume  my 
thirty  minutes !  [Laugh.]  My  opponent  has  charged  me  with  chal- 
lenging the  world  to  a  public  discussion.  This  I  positively 
deny. 

Afternoon. — More  proofs  from  Dr.  Ely. 

Mr.  Kneeland.  I  ask  what  did  we  come  here  to  do  ?  Why 
collect  this  crowded  and  respectable  audience  together?  Was  it 
not  to  discuss  the  proposition  read  in  your  hearing?  I  have  there- 
fore urged  him  on  his  own  account,  and  for  the  sake  of  this  en- 
quiring assembly,  if  he  be  able  to  handle  his  doctrine  as  he  ought, 
that  he  doit  at  once;  for  as  yet,  he  has  not  said  one  word  about 
it.  It  is  useless  for  him  to  take  up  your  time,  and  to  disappoint 
your  expectations  by  talking  about  my  opinions  and  the  supposed 
inconsistencies  of  my  writings;  for  they  have  no  bearing  upon 
thepovU  whatever!  It  appears  to  me,  and  I  think  it  must  also 
appear  to  you,  that  my  opponent  had  not  only  the  outlines,  but 
the  very  body  of  his  argument  prepared  before  he  came  to  the 
controversy;  for  he  is  going  straight  on  in  his  long  story  without 
taking  notice  of  aught  I  say. 

No.  S. 

Thursday,  Forenoon. — Dr.  Ely  goes  straight  on. 

Mr.  Kneeland.  I  feel  anxious  to  consume  ray  thirty  minutes, 
but  in  truth;  I  know  not  what  to  say.  I  have  so  repeatedly  call- 
ed upon  my  opponent  to  come  forward  with  his  evidence,  that  I 
think  there  will  be  no  necessity  to  call  upon  him  again,  if  he  has 
any  to  produce.  He  has  certainly  not  produced  any  yet  that  I 
observed,  and  I  pay  all  the  attention  to  my  opponent's  arguments 
that  they  deserve,  as  I  take  minutes  of  every  thing  of  importance 
which  he  advances  connected  with  the  subject,  and  yet  I  have 
observed  nothing.  It  has  been  suggested  to  me  this  morning,  as 
a  report  in  circulation,  and  very  generally  received;  that  an  im- 


xliu. 

pressicn  was  made  upon  the  andienee  assembled  here  yesterday 
afternoon,  very  mucb  in  favour  of  my  opponent,  and  that  his 
cause  was  rising.  If  it  be  so  I  am  truly  ghid  of  it  !  There  is  no 
person  present  to  whom  such  a  report  affords  more  satisfaction 
than  to  your  speaker;  for,  to  it,  in  a  great  measure,  may  be  at- 
tributed your  being  drawn  together  this  morning  in  increased 
numbers.  1  am  also  glad  that  his  cause  is  rising  in  yonr  minds, 
because  the  more  powerful  impression  he  now  malces  on  you, 
respecting  the  truth  of  his  doctrine,  the  greater  will  be  his  de- 
feat if  he  should  fail  to  prove  it.  I  am  sorry  that  truth  con- 
strains me  to  declare,  I  have  met  with  more  powerful  evidence, 
brought  in  favour  of  eternal  misery,  by  lay-men,  even  by  ap- 
prentice boys,  at  the  I  ommissioner's  Hall  in  the  ISorthern  Li- 
berties, than  I  have  heard  this  morning  from  my  opponent.  I 
feel  sorry  tbat  a  reverend  gentleman  should   have  come  all  the 

way  from to  teach  the  citizens  of  Philadelphia  theology, 

without  being  possessed  of  abilities  better  adapted  to  the  task. 

Afternoon. — The  Doctor's  evidence  increases  in  strength. 

Mr  Kneeland.  Has  he  proved  his  part  of  the  proposition  ? 
Has  he  met  me  on  the  point  which  was  to  decide  it'  So.  he  has 
not.  And  is  it  because  he  has  evaded  it,  and  has  tried  to  lead 
you  away  from  it,  that  his  cause  is  rising?  Does  his  cause  yet  rise? 
Does  it  yet  make  the  shining  faces  as  f  understand  so  many  of  his 
friends  had  this  morning?  ^Jlfter  a  short  lucid  interval  Mr.  Knee- 
land  observetF]  My  hearers  must  ptn-ceive  the  reason  why  1  go 
into  this  extraneous  matter. — What  shall  I  do  ? — Say  nothing  ? 
If  my  opponent  will  give  me  any  thing  better  to  talk  about}  I 
will  not  wander.  j,.. 

No.  4. 

Friday,  Forenoon,     Dr.  Fly  still  strengthens  his  proofs. 

Mr.  Kneeland.  As  my  opponent  has  given  me  nothing  new 
to  reply  to,  I  have  nothing  of  course  to  say  in  answer.  Is  the 
cause  of  my  opponent  still  rising.  Has  he  gained  such  a  won- 
derful victory  ?  The  nearer  a  man  approaches  to  the  brink  of  a 
steep  precipice  the  greater  is  the  danger  of  his  falling  over.  Has 
it  not  been  so  with  my  opponeot?  He  would  have  drawn  back, 
but  I  was  too  close  behind  him. 

Afternoon.  Mr.  Kneeland,  While  I  am  speaking  he  is  read- 
ing his  little  book,  without  attending  to  the  arguments  I  mav  of- 
fer against  his  doctrine.  My  opponent  has  once  more  turned  to 
his  little  book,  and  of  this  I  am  glad,  for  he  has  really  enter- 
tained you  better  with  what  he  has  read  therefrom,  than  he  did 
in  his  former  address.  This  is  no  discussion — this  is  continued 
reading  straight  forward  on  his  part,  and  incessant  entreaties  on 
mine,  to  bring  him  to  the  point  in  dispute. 

Dr.  Ely  being  informed  Ijy  Mr.  Kneeland  that  the  house  might 
not  be  had  any  longer,  closed. 


xliv 

Hearing  that  cousin  R,  L.  Jennings  had  found  dull  sale  for 
his  work  in  6  numbers,  I  thought  it  safer  to  divide  mine  into  4. 
If,  liowever,  it  should  meet  with  due  encouragement,  it  is  my 
intention  to  add  two  more  numbers  to  the  second  edition.  The 
5lh  to  coutam  cousin  Jenning's  first  great  effort  after  his  ordi- 
nation to  the  ministry  in  the  L'niversali^t  Synagogue.  It  is  bis 
essay  on  little  family  dogs^  published  in  the  Democratic  Press 
of  the  13fh  inst.*  It  is  said  that  Homer  wrote  first  the  wars  of 
the  frogs  and  then  the  war  of  Troy.  There  is  no  telling  what 
our  cousin  may  yet  come  to.  He  has  already  made  such  pro- 
ficiency in  the  dead  languages,  that  he  thinks  himself  able  "  to 
compare  the  letters  which  are  used  to  form  one  word  with  the 
letters  that  are  used  to  form  another,  and  if  the}*  do  not  agree, 
to  alter  them."  At  least,  he  thinks,  "  it  is  probable  the  writer, 
[^that  is,  Cousin  Jennings,^  could  do  this  much  himself,  were  he 
to  attempt  it!"  This  is  as  much  as  to  say  that  he  has  not  yet 
attempted  it.  What  then  must  we  think  of  that  genius  who  can 
consult  Hebrew  and  Greek  Lexicons  and  Concordances,  and 
write  critical  notes  on  the  sacred  languages,  when  he  has  never 
yet  attempted  to  learn  their  alphabets,  and  when  he  has  no  other 
created  assistance  than  a  little  family  dog  at  his  elbow.  If  he 
had  a  great  butcher's  dog  or  a  pack  of  hounds  there,  he  would 
be  equal  to  a  man  of  sound  mind,  who  said  a  few  years  ago,  that 
he  could  speak  all  the  languages  spoken  in  Jerusalem  on  the  day 
of  Pentecost. 

The  6th  number  will  be  devoted  to  a  couple  of  lectures  writ- 
ten by  brother  Morse  on  the  philosophy  of  language,  In  the 
first  of  them  he  will  prove  that  when  a  preacher  professes  to 
write  on  Universalism,  a  lawyer  on  Forgery,  or  a  physician  on 
Insanity,  they  must  write  in  favour  of  ihese  things,  or  be  guilty  of 
deception. t  'I'o  this  will  be  appended  a  few  remarks  of  brother 
Kneeland's  last  letter  to  Dr.  Ely  4  shewing  thatjit  is  more  chari- 
table to  attribute  the  use  of  such  language  "  to  a  disturbed  ima- 
gination or  a  disordered  brain,  than  it  is  to  say  that  it  proceeds 
from  a  worse  motive  !"  The  second  lecture  will  be  on  the 
subject  ot  controversial  etii^uette  ;  in  which  brother  Morse  will 
prove,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  his  letter  of  the  10th  inst.§ 
that  for  an  orthodox  minister  to  route  five  Universalist  assail- 
ants at  once,  is  as  indecorous  as  the  conduct  of  that  revolutiona- 
ry American  who  surrounded  seven  British  soldiers. 

Before  taking  leave  of  the  pul)lic,  I  wish  them  to  remember 
that  the  above  report  of  Mr.  Kneeland's  defence  of  Universal 
ism  is  in  his  own  words,  as  approved  by  himself,  without  either 
alteration  in  language  or  injusticf-  to  argument.  There  is  only  a 
little  liberty  taken  in  an  arbitrary  arrangement  of  his  expressions; 
in  'vhich  however,  I   nave    been  very  modest,  in   comparison 

•See  No.  20.        f  See  No.  16.        :tSee  No.  19.        §See  No.  17. 


with  my  cousin  R.  L.  Short-hand,  in  the  liberties  which  he  has 
taken,  in  snppressinc;  and  inventing,  culling  and  rollecting,  alter- 
ing: and  arranginK  the  ♦expressions  of  Mr.  Kneeliind's  j»ntagonist. 

R.  L.  LOxNGHA^D. 

Philadelphia,  Sept.  17,   1824. 


No.  22. 

FROM  THE  FRANKLIN  GAZETTE,  OF  OCT.  7. 

DEBATE  ON  UNIVERSALISM. 

TO  MR.  WILLIAM  MORSE. 

In  the  Franklin  Gazette  of  the  ilth  of  September,  you  have 
addressed  a  letter  to  me.  It  is  not  necessary  for  me  to  state 
my  reasons  for  answering  it  so  tardily,  or  tor  answermg  it  at 
all.  Although  it  may  be  dishonourable  for  the  five  persons  of 
whom  you  speak,  to  make  an  unfair  and  unjust  assault  upon 
me,  there  is  no  reason  to  be  ashamed  thai  God  has  enabled  me 
to  make  a  successful  resistance.  "  There  is  no  restraint  to  the 
Lord  to  sdive  by  many  or  by  few."  The  case  would  not  be  alter- 
ed if  30U  and  your  four  brethren  were  multiplied  by  a  hun- 
dred, each  brandishing  a  forgt  d  letter  in  his  hand  ;  For  Jehovah 
has  p'i^miset!  bis  faithfid  servants,  that  one  shall  "  chase  i;  thou- 
sand, and  two  put  ten  thousand  to  flight."  Whenever  five  men 
or  five  bundred  resort  to  personalities  and  pious  frauds,  men  of 
sense  *ill  suspect  that  tbeir  cause  is  desperate.  Mr.  Kneeland 
consumed  much  of  bis  tedious  time  during  the  debate  m  canvas- 
sing my  personal  character,  and  you  and  Mr.  Ballon  have  since 
joined  him  in  tbat  important  occupation  in  the  public  prints,  If 
this  were  not  intended  to  injure  the  truth,  you  might  divide  my 
reputation,  as  the  Jews  did  my  Master's  garments,  between  vou. 
It  is  with  the  greatest  reluctance  that  I  leave,  for  a  moment,  the 
real  subject  in  controversy,  to  answer  forgeries  and  fables, 
whether  the  old  wives  who  publish  them  be  male  or  female, ^uc 
or  fifty. 

Although  you  and  your  associates,  in  subserviency  to  the 
great  accuser  of  the  brethren,  are  engaged  in  the  same  work, 
you  have  different  lists  of  charges.  The  sum  of  3  our  several 
catalogues  appears  to  be,  that  you  accuse  me  of  saying,  daring 
the  debate,  that  Mr.  Kneeland  wrote  and  publisbed  a  Greek 
grammar; — of  saying,  since  the  debate,  that  1  was  denied  the 
continued  use  ot  the  house; — that  Mr.  Kneeland  has  since  re- 
fused to  meet  me; — that  Mr.  Ballou  has,  without  my  invitation, 
done  the  same  ; — that  Mr.  Kneeland  sent  me  the  first  number  of 
Mr.  Jennings's  report ; — tbat  he  has  a  hand  with  him  in  that 
work  ; — and  that  it  is  a  spurious  production. 

As  the  affair  of  the  Greek  grammar  is  mentioned  in  the  re- 


xlvi 

port,  an  examination  of  its  genuineness  will,  if  Providence  per-- 
niit,  recall  that  subject  on  a  future  occasion.  Tlie  refusal  of 
the  house  until  my  argument  was  completed  may  now  receive 
a  partial  attention.  Mr.  Kneeland  has  said  in  an  article  of 
the  1st  of  September,  and  afterwards  in  his  letter  to  Dr.  Kly  of 
the  13(h,  that  it  is  untrue  that  I  "  was  denied  the  use  of  the 
church  in  Lombard-street  any  longer.''  In  the  former,  he  says 
that  "  Dr.  Ely  knows  himself  to  the  contrary;"  and  in  the  latter, 
that  Dr.  Ely  has  "  not  the  liardihood  to  deny"  this  and  similar 
accusations.  Besides  the  notorious  concurrence  of  the  audience 
whc  attended  the  debate,  in  denying  this  charge,  itis  well  known 
to  you  that  Dr.  Elv  had  denied  it  in  that  very  letter  which  this 
of  Mr.  Kneelamd  professes  to  answer.  As  Dr.  Ely  was  our 
moderator  on  the  last  day,  he  must  have  known  whether  I  was 
denied  the  farther  use  of  the  house  or  not.  If  I  was  not  refused 
this  privilege,  he  must  have  known  that  my  complaint  of  the 
house  being  denied  was  untrue,  and  that  to  acquit  me  of  raise- 
hood  was  becoming  an  accomplice  in  my  crime.  Yet  in  his  let- 
ter to  Mr.  Kneeland.  of  the  11th  ultimo,  he  has  not  only  acquit- 
ted n>e  himself,  but  has  declared  that  he  believes  m3'  veraci- 
ty to  he  unquestioned,  not  only  among  the  hearers  of  our  debate, 
but  all  others  except  a  few  Universalists.  The  following  are  his 
own  words: 

"  His  veracity,  so  far  as  I  know,  was  never  questioned  by  any 
before  he  conin)enced  a  correspondence  with  you  ;  and  since, 
none  doubt  it  but  a  few  who  believe  in  the  universal  salvation  of 
mankind.  These  seem  tomeio  doubt  the  veracity  of  God,  and 
to  believe  in  the  veracity  of  the  *  father  of  lies,'  who  said  '  ye 
shall  not  surely  die;'  so  that  it  is  no  wonder  if  they  should  call 
Mr.  M'C'allaa/um" 

This  declaration  of  Dr.  Ely  is  a  denial  of  Mr.  Kneeland's 
charge,  and  certainly  attaches  guilt  to  his  subsequent  assertion, 
that  Dr.  VAy  had  *'  not  the  hardihood  to  deny"  a  thing  so  no- 
toriously incorrect. 

In  >our  letter  you  appear  to  think  with  some  reason,  that  this 
subject  may  be  illustrated  by  the  case  of  Mr.  Ballou,  and  the 
forged  challenge  which  gave  him  such  unnecessary  alarm.  Your 
■words  are,  "the  refusal  of  Mr.  Ballou  to  meet  Mr.  M't'alla 
is  not  unlike  \vhat  has  more  than  once  been  called  a  refusal 
of  the  church  in  Lombard-street  to  continue  the  debate.'' 

1  confess  they  are  alike  in  four  particidars  at  least.  I.  They 
are  both  well  known  matters  of  fact.  2.  The  same  moral  in- 
firmity made  Mr  Ballou  refuse  to  commence  a  discussion, 
which  made  Mr.  Kneeland  refuse  to  continue  it.  3.  Both  these 
facts  have  been  alike  denied  by  Mr.  Morse.  4.  They  resemble 
each  other  in  both  being  made  occasions  of  a  charge  of  untruth 
against  an  innocent  person,  which  charge  recoiled  upon  its  guilty 


xlvii 

fiibficator.  They  are  therefore  almost  as  much  alike  as  two 
peas,  or  as  the  two  pillars  of  Hamau's  gallows,  which  hung  the 
man  who  built  them. 

While  noting  resemblances,  you  might  with  safety  have  added 
to  the  list  Mr.  Kneeland's  refusal  to  meet  me  again,  since  the 
debate  was  closed.  The  assertion  of  this  fact  he  has  impugned 
in  his  letter  of  the  13th  ultimo.  In  his  communication  of  the 
3d  of  September  to  Mr.  Rinns,  he  says,  "  it  will  be  perceived  that 
I  have  offered  to  meet  Mr.  M'Calla  again,  or  in  other  vvords  have 
accepted  his  challenge,  on  condition  that  his  friends  will  open  one 
of  <^heir  churches  to  accommodate  the  audience,  as  proof  that  thej 
approve  of  his  manner  of  conducting  an  argument,  together  with 
some  other  conditions  therein  named,  not  one  of  which  has  he 
complied  with.  Until  therefore  he  shall  comply  with  those  con- 
ditions, or  others  equally  fair,  I  have  nothing  more  to  say  to  him 
on  the  subject." 

It  is  said  that  he  has  impressed  some  of  his  credulous  follow- 
ers with  a  belief,  that  a  compliance  o»  my  part  with  one  of  his 
conditions  such  as  finding  a  church,  is  all  that  he  requires,  to 
another  meeting.  In  the  above  article,  however,  he  refers  to  his 
letter  of  August  2d,  published  in  the  Franklin  Gazette  of  Aug. 
21st,  and  requires  a  compliance  "  with  some  other  conditions 
therein  named,"  such  as  uniting  with  him  in  religious  worship 
and  giving  him  my  hand  *'  in  token  oi  friendship  P^  that  is,  of 
christian  fellowship,  as  he  means.  These  conditions  evidently 
require  me  to  do  what  the  church  of  Christ  has  never  yet  done  j 
that  is,  to  acknowledge  the  Christianity  of  an  Unitarian.  They 
require  me  to  violate  a  good  conscience,  and  give  up  the  point  in 
dispute,  before  he  will  discuss  it  with  me.  What  he  means  by 
other  conditions  "  equally  fair,^^  I  know  not,  unless  he  intends 
to  require  that  in  place  of  worshipping  with  him,  his  antagonist 
must  be  gagged,  and  that  instead  of  giving  him  one  hand,  I  must 
have  botli  tied  behind  my  back  ;  for  these  conditions  would  be 
equally  fair  with  those  required  in  his  letter.  If  I  were  to  re- 
quire as  an  indispensable  condition  to  another  meeting,  that  he 
should  appear  on  the  arena  with  a  halter  round  his  neck,  every 
one  would  consider  it  a  retreat  from  the  conflict  :  so  when  he 
makes  a  sine  qua  nan  of  a  moral  impossibility,  it  is  a  refusal  to 
meet  me.  No  man  who  was  willing  to  submit  his  opinions  to 
an  investigation  of  this  sort  ever  required  such  terms.  Mr. 
Kneeland  himself  did  not  demand  them  until  sore  experience 
taught  him  to  do  so.  His  doing  so,  however,  proves  that  while 
he  boasts  of  success,  he  feels  the  realities  of  a  defeat.  His 
church  was  built  for  the  spread  of  Universalism.  He  pretends 
that  our  debate  promoted  this  end  :  yet  the  house  cannot  be  ob- 
tained for  me  to  finish  n\y  argument!  He  pretends  that  the  dis- 
cussion multiplied  proselytes  to  Universalism,  and  greatly  in^ 
creased  the  sale  of  his  books:  vet  we  cannot  have  the  house  a 


ilviii 

few  clays  longer,  least  his  books  and  his  followers  should  multiply 
like  the  lice  and  tlie  locusts  of  Kgypt  !  A  man  whose  con- 
science will  permit  him  to  speak  and  act  so  inconsistently,  is 
not  likely  to  be  scrupulous  about  writing  a  false  report,  and  af- 
terwards denying  it. 

In  Mr.  Kneeland's  article  and  letter  of  September  1st  and  13th 
he  charges  me  with  saying  that  he  sent  me  the  first  number  of 
this  report.  I  knew  tliat  Mr.  Jennings  had  sent  me  the  number; 
although  I  believed  then,  and  believe  now,  that  it  was  done  with 
Mr.  Kneeland's  knowledge,  and  by  his  authority.  I  therefore 
stated  in  my  letter  to  Mr.  Norvell  of  August  10,  '  that  a  copy 
had  been  sent  to  each  of  the  parties."  This  was  accompanied 
with  an  intimation  of  the  quarter  from  which  it  came,  as  in  the 
following  extract:  "The  first  number  of  Mr.  Kneeland's  pro- 
mised minutes  of  the  discussion,  professing  to  be  taken  in  short 
hand  by  one  of  his  friends,  has  made  its  appearance.  If  there 
were  no  danger  of  detection,  it  would  be  a  tolerably  good  book 
for  promoting  the  views  of  its  author.  He  has  informed  the  pub- 
lic that  a  copy  has  been  sent  to  each  of  the  parties."  This  is  not 
saying  that  Mr.  Kneeland  sent  the  book,  but  "  that  a  copy  has 
been  sent."  The  person  who  sent  it  is  "its  author.  He  has 
informed  tn-  public"  of  the  fact.  It  has  two  authors  ;  Mr. 
Kneeland,  who  promised  the  mitiutes,  and  Mr.  Jennings,  who 
professed  to  taki'  them  in  short  hand.  I  meant,  and  I  said  with 
sufficient  clearness,  or  at  least  with  sufficient  correctness,  that 
the  latter  had  sent  me  the  first  number.  Mr.  Kneeland  insists 
upon  it  that  I  represented  him  as  sending  it. 

He  has  perverted  Dr.  Ely's  language  in  a  similar  way,  though 
in  a  much  more  inexcusable  manner.  In  his  letter  to  him,  he 
speaks  as  follows;  "And  after  all,  I  am  not  disposed  to  call 
Mr.  M'Calla  a  liar,  though  you  quoted  those  words,  '  a  liar  !' 
thereby  insinuating  that  he  had  been  so  called  by  a  few  who  be- 
lieve in  the  universal  salvation  of  mankind,  among  whom  you 
UNDOUBTEDLY  meant  to  include  me."  Dr.  V.\y  said  and  meant 
that  a  few  Universalists  had  given  me  this  name,  because  he  had 
been  circumstantially  informed  of  the  fact,  as  it  occurred  in  the 
Lombard  street  church,  a  few  minutes  after  the  debate  had  clos- 
ed. But  he  neither  meant  nor  said  that  Mr.  Kneeland  was  one 
of  these  persons,  as  appears  by  his  verbal  declaration,  and  by  his 
letter.  But,  like  the  man  who  thought  that  every  body  he  saw 
laughing  was  deriding  /tim,  Mr.  Kneeland  says,  "  you  undoubt- 
edly meant  to  include  ?7}e."  I  suppose  that  we  cannot  hereafter 
speak  of  the  world,  the  flesh  and  the  devil,  without  undoubtedly 
meaning  to  include  Mr.  Kneeland,  Mr.  Jennings  and  his  "lit- 
tle family  dog  ;"  which  famous  little  animal  has,  according  to 
Mr.  Jennings's  own  account,  become  his  preceptor  in  theology 
and  criticism.*    I  could  not  give  you  a  better  piece  of  advice 

•  See  No.  20 


xlix 

than  to  j^uard  you  against  both  the  teacher  and  his  evil-doing 
disciple,  in  the  words  of  Paul  to  the  Phillippians  :  "  Beware  of 
dogs,  beware  of  evil- workers." 

Although  Mr.  Jennings  is  the  only  one  who  has  openly  ac- 
knowledged his  obligation  to  this  Univeralist  professor  of  theo- 
logy, he  is  not  the  oniy  cynical  writer  who  defends  his  system. 
Perhaps  you  are  acquainted  with  a  certain  moderator,  who  after 
a  wholesome  chastisement  from  the  Rev,  J.  M.  imitated  Mr. 
Ballon,  by  snarling  an  insinuation  against  the  intellectual  sound- 
ness of  his  castigator.  Excuse  me  for  giving  an  extract  from 
Mr.  Kneeland's  last  letter  to  Dr.  Ely  in  illustration  of  the  same 
point.  By  way  of  administering  a  mild  and  charitable  Univer- 
salist  reproof  to  the  doctor,  for  an  insinuation  which  originated 
in  Mr.  Kneeland's  own  guilty  suspicion,  he  tells  him  that  he 
considers  such  insinuations  "  far  beneath  the  dignity  of  either 
the  gentleman  or  the  christian.  It  is  more  charitable,"  conti- 
nues this  temperate  and  polished  character  ;  *'  It  is  more  chari- 
table to  impute  such  intemperate  language,  as  that  which  has 
been  used  by  Mr.  M'Calla  and  his  vindicator^  to  a  disturbed 
imagination^  or  a  disordered  brain,  than  it  is  to  say  that  it  pro- 
ceeds from  a  worse  motive.  To  say  that  such  language  proceeds 
from  a  mind  that  is  sound,  is  only  to  acknowledge,  in  other 
words,  that  it  comes  from  a  heart  desperately  wicked." 

The  longer  our  correspondence  continues,  the  clearer  insight 
we  obtain  into  the  means  by  which  Universalists  defend  their 
creed.  They  first  charge  their  opponent  with  undoubtedly  mean- 
ing some  trine  which  he  never  meant  nor  said.  A  solemn  court 
of  inquiry  is  then  convened,  composed  of  the  wisest  heads  that 
can  be  found,  on  Mr.  Kneeland's  shoulders,  and  at  Mr.  Jen- 
nings's elbow.  In  such  a  court,  the  accused  and  his  vindicator 
too,  are  immediately  found  guilty  of  ungentlemcmly  and  unchris- 
tian  conduct,  proceeding  from  a  heart  desperately  wicked.  Then 
sweet  charity  begins  to  agitate  their  tender  bosoms,  and  they 
set  their  heads  and  elbows  closer  together,  to  devise  some  pious 
fraud,  some  plan  of  mercy,  whereby  these  desperately  wicked^ 
ungentlemanly  and  unchristian  characters  may  be  lovingly  trans- 
mitted from  the  jail  to  the  hospital.  Like  certain  judges  of  old- 
who  handed  over  their  orthodox  victims  to  the  secular  arm,  with 
earnest  entreaties  to  spare  their  precious  lives,  these  bland  jud- 
ges of  ours,  charitably  wish  that  we  could  only  be  immured  for 
fife,  and  considered  by  the  community  as  unfit  for  society  !  If 
this  were  the  doom  of  Mr.  J.  M.  and  Dr.  E.  and  all  their  vindi- 
cators, and  the  vindicators  of  truth,  then  each  of  their  churches 
might  be  furnished  with  a  Universalist  pastor  who  is  compos  men- 
tis ;  a  qualification  which  is  exceedingly  important  to  the  minis- 
terial office,  and  which  is  to  be  found  no  where  else  than  with 
Messrs.  Ballou  and  Kneeland,  Mr.  Morse,  Mr.  Jennings,  and 
his  canine  instructor. 

G 


1 

These  five  accomplislied  specimens  of  sanity,    chanty,  and 
Universalisni,  liave  not  disappointed  my  expectations  in  any  ar- 
tifice which  they  have  used  to  pollute   my  reputation.      Hefore 
the  commencement  of  the  present  controversy,  iny  friends  fairly 
warned  me  of  the  consequences,  in  the  tenor  of  the  old  proverb, 
with  which,  no  doubt,  Mr.  Jennings's  experience  coincides,  "he 
that  lies  down  with  dogs  must  rise  up  with  fleas."     Yet,  through 
grace,  I  am  willing  to  bear  all  for  the  sake  of  that  good   cause, 
which,  through  the  power  of  God,  is  moving  forward,  although, 
I  may  say  with  my  Divine  Redeemer,  that  "dogs  have  compas- 
sed me  :"the  assembly  of  the  wicked  have  enclosed  me."     How- 
ever great  may  be  their  numbers  and  their  industry,  and  how- 
ever cunning  they  wish  to  be  in  their  unprincipled  malignity,  it 
is  evident  that  their  counsels,  like  those  of  Absalom,  are  left  to 
judicial  infatuation.     What  more  visionary  scheme  could  a  Uni- 
versalist  himself  invent,  than  that  of  Mr.  Jennings,  to  make  the 
world  believe  that  without  any  human  aid,  he  could  record  from 
the  lips  of  rapid  speakers,  with  oithographical  and   even  orthoe- 
pical  accuracy,  long  dissertations  on  Hebrew  and  Greek  words, 
when  he  does  not  pretend  to  an  acquaintance  with  even  the  al- 
phabets of  these  languages  }     He  has  made  critical  annotations 
to  my  pretended  speeches.     These,  like  Mr.  Kneeland's  writ- 
ings, are   an  affectation  of  great  familiarity  with  Hebrew  and 
Greek  literature.     Is  this  consistent  with  the  fact,  that  he  does 
not-  know  the  names  nor  the  powers  of  the   letters  composing 
those  words  which  he  pietends  to  have  written  ?     Without  this 
knowledge  himself,  and  without  the  aid  of  any  other  human  be- 
ing, this  Universalist  wiseacre  would  have  the  world  believe  that 
he  can  unlock  the  ti-easures  of  lexicons,  and  concordances,  and 
translations  in  the  dead  languages  !     He  must  surely  think  not 
only  that  the  parties  are  insane,  but  that  the  whole  community  is 
run  mad.     Such  a  tale  carries  in  itself  its  own  refutation.     The 
man  who  can  invent  and  utter  such  a  story  must  have  an  under- 
standing as  beclouded  as  his  conscience  is  depraved. 

Yet,  strange  as  it  may  seem.  Mr.  Kneelaud,  in  the  present 
sinking  state  of  his  affairs,  has  caught  at  this  straw,  to  keep  him 
from  going  to  the  bottom.  He  has  even  made  repeated  assault* 
upon  the  character  of  my  head  and  heart,  because  I  will  not 
join  him  and  his  short-hand  aid-de-camp  in  this  mutiny  against 
common  sense.  What  makes  this  Universalist  conspiration 
against  sanity  and  integrity  the  more  absurd,  is  that  Mr.  Knee- 
land's  participation  in  Mr.  Jennings's  celebrated  minutes  of  the 
debate  is  proved  by  frequent  newspaper  publications  of  his  own. 
While  I  proceed  to  show  this,  will  you  be  so  kind  as  to  remem- 
ber thnt  your  Mr.  Jenninj;.?  has  said  in  the  Franklin  Gazette,  of 
August  2,  "  I  therefore  publickly  acknowledge  myself  to  be  the 
sole  publisher  of  the  said  debate,  and  as  publicly  disown  being 


li 

engaged  with  either  of  the  parties,  directly  or  indirectly. ^^  Com- 
pare this  with  Mr.  Kneelai.ds  previous  declaration,  published 
July  21,  tiiat  "the  whole  discussion  has  been  taken  down  in 
short-hand  by  a  stenographer  employed  for  the  purpose.' '  Who 
it  is  that  has  employed  this  unengaged  reporter  must  be  learned 
from  the  Universalists,  one  of  whom,  not  being  awaieof  the  cheat, 
declared  to  several  persons,  of  whom  I  was  one,  that  the  vestry 
of  his  church,  of  whose  integrity  he  appeared  to  have  a  high  opi- 
nion, intended  to  appropriate  !lie  surplus  proceeds  of  the  work,  to 
some  charitable  purpose.  This  he  said  by  way  of  recommend- 
ing the  book  to  our  patronage.  Knowing  that  Mr.  Kneeland 
was  the  soul  of  that  Vestry,  and  knowing  that  '  the  tender  mer- 
cies of  the  wicked  are  cruel,'  the  plan  did  not  meet  my  approba- 
tion. 

Whether  Mr.  Jennings  is  or  is  not  "engaged  with  either  of 
the  parties,  directly  or  indirectly,"  will  appear  farther  from  Mr, 
Kneeland's  "  caution  to  the  public"'  against  the  catch-penny 
pamphlet,  called  the  Substance  of  the  debute.  In  this  notice, 
published  in  the  National  Gazette.  July  23d,  he  pledges  his  word 
that  the  public  shall  be  furnished  with  "the  real  discussion  in 
full.  '  His  words  are  the  following  :  "A  copy-right  of  the  real 
discussion  has  been  secured,  and  will  soon  be  published  in  full." 
In  this  instance  he  makes  no  allusion  to  Mr.  Jennings,  and  in  the 
former  he  does  not  mention  his  name,  but  only  speaks  of  him  as 
"  a  stenographer  employed  for  the  purpose."  In  both  cases  he 
makes  the  promise  on  his  own  responsibility;  Why  could  he  not 
make  the  same  engagements  with  regard  to  the  pamphlet  which 
he  had  just  condemned  as  a  catch-penny  ?  Evidently  because 
he  had  nothing  to  do  with  that  work  ;  whereas  Mr.  Jennings's 
catch-penny  was  subject  to  his  control.  This  is  the  only  rea- 
son which  a  reasonable  man  can  give  for  promising,  on  his  own 
responsibility,  that  it  shall  be  the  real  discussion  in  full. 

In  Mr.  Jennings's  article  of  August  7,  he  says  :  "I  am  the 
reporter  of  neither  Mr.  Kneeland  nor  Mr.  M'Calla."  Compare 
this  with  Mr.  Kneeland's  letter  of  August  2.  The  following 
are  his  words  :  "  As  to  the  new  matter  to  which  I  had  not  an 
opportunity  to  reply  [Ps.  9:  5]  since  it  makes  nothing  in  your 
favor,  nor  against  any  of  my  arguments,  a  bare  note  in  a  very 
few  lines  will  be  all  the  reply  I  shall  need."  Although  in  the 
debate  Mr.  Kneeland  refused  me  the  liberty  of  finishing  m^  ar- 
gument, he  gave  me  the  last  speech.  He  voluntarily  resigned 
the  privilege  of  replying  then,  and  has  ever  since  refused  to  open 
the  discussion  anew.  Notwithstanding  this,  he  has  no  doubt  of 
an  opportunity  to  reply  now,  and  thus  virtually  have  the  last 
speech  in  Mr.  Jennings's  disinterested  and  impartial  report  ! 

As  Mr.  Kneeland  had  informed  the  public  that  a  person  was 
"  employed  for  the  purpose,"  it  was  expected  that  he  would  one 


lii 

day  or  other  condescend  to  let  us  know  his  name.  According- 
ly, in  a  notice  of  August  6th,  he  tells  us  that  these  minutes  were 
*'  taken  in  short-hand  by  R.  L.  Jennings."  Although  this  no- 
tice announced  the  work  as  now  in  press,  and  described  its  cha- 
racter, and  detailed  its  terms  of  sale  and  place  of  deposit,  it  was 
not  still  Mr.  Jennings's  notice  but  Mr.  Kneeland's.  The  form- 
er is  not  yet  known  as  an  independent  editor,  but  the  latter  of 
this  promising  pair,  who  had  first  told  us  that  a  stenographer 
was  employed,  then  promised  to  give  us  the  "  real  discussion  in 
full,"  now  comes  forward  over  the  head  of  Mr.  Jennings,  and 
informs  us  of  his  terms  of  supplying  purcliasers,  subscribers  and 
agents  ;  and  closes  by  telling  the  public  that  the  "  books  may  be 
had  at  the  Rev.  Mr,  Kneeland^s,  or  at  the  bookstores  generally 
in  the  city. " 

It  is  evident  that  the  first  plan  adopted  by  these  partners  in 
iniquity  was  for  Mr.  Jennings  to  keep  himself  out  of  view,  and 
to  pass  off  their  spurious  minutes  as  an  authentic  report,  ap- 
proved by  the  moderators,  but  particularly  authoi'ized  by  both 
the  parties  5  "knowing,"  as  Mr.  Jennings  says,  "that  with 
their  approbation  the  work  would  be  better  received  by  the  pub- 
lic." For  this  purpose  a  general  rumor  was  industriously  pro- 
pagated, that  Mr.  Kneeland  and  myself  acted  in  concert.  By 
means  of  an  Universalist  who  really  thought  the  story  true,  a 
near  relative  of  my  own  was  impressed  with  a  belief  of  its  cor- 
rectness, until  I  undeceived  him.  As  Mr.  Kneland  had  already 
in  his  own  opinion,  gained  one  object  by  writing  for  both  parties, 
without  my  consent,  he  tried  what  could  be  done  by  the  same 
method  in  carrying  this  point  also.  For  this  purpose,  when  he 
published  in  the  National  Gazette  his  caution  against  the  rival 
catch-penny,  and  promised  to  the  public  his  own  catch-penny, 
which  he  nicknamed  "  the  real  discussion,"  he  added  the  follow- 
ing note  :  viz.  "Printers  who  have  advertised  the  above  work 
will  do  an  act  of  justice  to  the  parties  by  inserting  the  above." 
The  effect  which  Mr.  Kneeland  knew  this  would  produce,  and 
which  it  did  produce  very  decidedly  and  extensively,  was  con- 
siderably increased  and  confirmed  by  my  being  precluded  from 
the  privilege  of  exposing  the  imposition  in  the  same  paper. 

Although  this  artifice  caught  many  a  penny  from  persons  who 
have  since  declared  themselves  grossly  deceived,  Mr.  Kneeland 
found  that  it  would  finally  fail.  As  the  public  must  soon  be 
convinced  that  the  report  was  disavowed  and  condemned  by  me, 
he  was  determined  to  wash  his  hands  of  it,  lest  it  should  be 
treated  as  a  Universalist  book.  The  plan  must  be  altered.  The 
responsibility  must  now  be  devolved  upon  some  impartial  per- 
son. Under  this  character  it  is  that  Mr,  Jennings  makes  his 
entre  before  the  public  as  the  sole  editor  of  the  work.  A  re- 
port is  circulated  that  he  is  a  Baptist j  of  course  my  Triends  must 


llii 

buy  his  book.  In  the  eommencement  of  this  new  campaign,  he 
blusters  in  the  papers  about  not  being  able  to  find  nse  in  the 
city?  insinuating  that  1  retreat  to  the  country  for  fear  of  meet- 
ing him.  At  last,  after  riding  twelve  miles  tor  his  accommoda- 
tion, I  obtained  an  interview  with  this  new  acquaintance,  and 
asked  him  to  what  religious  denomination  he  belonged.  He  at 
first  insinuates  that  he  is  a  Baptist.  Upon  a  cross  examination, 
he  is  obliged  to  confess  himself  a  Universalist.  As  this  occur- 
red in  the  presence  of  witnesses,  he  considered  farther  dissimu- 
lation in  this  particular  of  no  use,  and  therefore  turned  out  Uni- 
versalist preacher  immediately  after.  Although  this  was  done 
under  the  patronage  of  Mr.  Kneeland,  who  had,  with  his  impli- 
cit approbation,  promised  and  proposed  the  report  on  his  own 
responsibility,  and  represented  Mr.  Jennings  as  "■  employed  for 
the  purpose,"  the  latter  now  declares  himself  "the  sole  publish- 
er of  the  said  debate,"  "  the  reporter  of  neither  Mr.  Kneeland 
nor  Mr.  M'Calla,"  and  is  daring  enough  to  "  disown  being  en- 
^c^crfwith  either  of  the  parties,  directly  or  indirectly.''^ 

Being  thus  embarked  in  a  vessel  which  Mr.  Kneeland  had 
abandoned,  the  disciple  hoists  the  same  false  colors  under  which 
the  master  had  sailed.  Notwithstanding  my  frequent  public 
condemnations  of  his  report,  he  persists,  number  after  number, 
in  an  attempt  to  persuade  the  community  that  I  have  not  found 
one  fault  in  it,  and  of  course  that  it  appears  to  me  correct.  Take 
his  postscript  on  the  cover  of  the  fourth  number  as  a  specimen  : 
viz.  "This  fourth  number  is  respectfully  presented  to  the 
public  ;  not  with  increased  confidence  of  its  correctness, 
but  with  increased  satisfaction  that  the  former  numbers  have  been 
received  with  such  general  approbation,  not  one  error  having 
been  pointed  out,  according  to  the  above  request,  in  any  one  of 
the  three  first  numbers."  The  fifth  number  would,  doubtless, 
have  been  adorned  with  a  similar  postscript,  if  Mr.  Jennings  had 
not  known  that  it  contained  an  invented  address  of  one  of  the 
moderators;  which  goes  clearly  to  prove  that  this  man  is  essen- 
tially deficient  either  in  skill  or  integrity  as  a  reporter.  With 
divine  permission  this  shall  be  more  fully  proved  in  a  short  time. 

While  Mr.  Kneeland  was  the  ostensible  editor,  he  advertised 
without  hesitation  that  "  the  books  may  be  had  at  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Kneeland's."  Since  he  has  become  ashamed 'of  his  authorship,  it 
is  necessary  to  cloak  his  activity  in  selling  the  work.  For  this 
purpose  Mr.  Jennings,  in  his  article  of  the  11th  ultimo,  tells  us 
that  the  books  were  sold  at  Mr.  Kneeland's  house  merely  be- 
cause it  was  a  more  central  situation  than  his  own,  and  that  his 
brother,  a  lad,  stayed  there  during  the  day,  as  a  salesman!  A 
very  important  point  this,  when  the  author  had  already  told  us 
that  the  bookstores  generally  were  engaged  in  the  sale.  But  if 
every  bookseller  were  in  Mr.  Kneeland's  situation,  which  how- 


Uv 

ever  is  not  the  case,  Mr.  Jennings's  fruitful  invention  could 
easily  furiiisli  them  with  a  lad  apiece  to  bear  the  responsibility. 
Howditferent  is  this  complicated  and  contradictory  system  of 
Universalist  chicanery  from  the  plain  dealing  of  orthodox  iiones- 
ty!  As  soon  as  possible,  ihope  to  lay  before  the  publ  c  mv  own 
book,  with  my  own  name  to  it.  I  wish  no  one  else  to  write  it  or 
to  father  it  for  me. 

Octobers,  1824.  W.   L.  M'CALLA, 

No.  23. 

FROM  THE   DEMOCRATIC  PRESS,   OF    OCT.  T. 

UNI  VERS  ALISM  AND  UNITARIANISM. 

Mr.  Binns: — In  the  universal  joy  of  Americans,  occasioned  by 
(he  visit  of  General  La  Fayette,. the  Clergy  of  all  denominations 
have  a  cordial  participation.  In  Philadelphia,  they  have  made 
an  open  expression  of  a  sentiment  which  is  every  where  felt, 
though  generally  in  silence.  On  Friday  the  1st  inst.  they  wait- 
ed upon  our  illustrious  visitant  in  a  bod  v.  They  consisted  of 
Roman  Catholics,  Episcopalians,  Methodists,  Baptists.,  German 
Lutherans,  and  Swedish  Lutherans.  Besides  Presbyterians  ot 
the  General  Assembly,  there  were  members  of  the  Scotch  Re- 
formed and  Associate  Churches,  as  also  of  the  Dutch  Reformed, 
German  Reformed  and  several  other  denominations,  amounting 
as  1  was  told,  to  about  seventy  persons.  How  ever  these  diiiered 
in  their  views  of  doctrine  and  worship,  government  and  disci- 
pline, they  appeared  to  agree  in  these  three  things  at  least.  1. 
In  placing  liishop  White,  the  venerable  Chaplain  of  the  Revo- 
lutionary Congress,  in  the  chair.  2.  In  loving  our  national  guest, 
the  companion  of  Washington,  as  an  instrument  in  the  hand  of 
God,  for  the  establishment  of  American  Liberty.  3.  In  exclud- 
ing from  their  procession  those  clergymen,  (falsely  so  called,) 
who  deny  the  supreme  deity  of  Jesus  CUnist,  and  a  future  state 
of  rewards  and  punishments.  Those  who  are  called  Universal- 
ists  here,  deny  these  and  other  essential  truths  of  Christianity. 
Neither  they  nor  the  Unitarians  made  their  appearance,  nor  were 
they  invited.  In  this,  the  orthodox  clergy  acted  as  their  fathers 
did  in  the  churches  of  England  and  Scotland,  of  France  and 
Switzerland,  Germany  and  Holland,  Bohemia  and  Poland  ;  as 
did  the  Hussites  and  Lollards,  the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses, 
tlie  Claudians  and  Paulicians;  like  the  churches  and  councils  of 
Greece  and  Rome  in  their  best  days,  which  rejected  such 
jnen  as  Arius  and  Sabellius;  and  like  the  Apostles,  who  rejected 
Cerinthus  and  Simon  Magus. 

By  the  9th  article  and  4th  section  of  the  Constitution  of  this 
State,  it  will  be  seen  that  none  but  such  a  Universalist  or  Athe- 


Iv 

ist,  as  denies  "  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments  shall, 
on  account  of  his  religious  sentiments,  be  disqualified  to  hold  any 
office  or  place  of  trust  or  profit  under  this  Commonwealth."  God 
has  declared  that  "  he  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlast- 
ing life,  and  he  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life,  but 
the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him.'' 

W.  L.  M'CALLA. 

Philadelphia^  Oct.  6th,  1824. 


No.  24. 
Although,  upon  a  comparison  of  the  foliowinp  communica- 
tion in  the  Democratic  Press,  of  October  I4th,  with  No.  17, 
and  other  productions  of  Mr.  Morse,  it  will  be  found  that  he 
has  got  some  man  to  lend  bis  pen,  who  had  too  much  sense 
and  respectability  to  risque  his  name  ;  yet  as  Mr.  Moise  is 
responsible  for  its  contents,  it  shows  him  to  be  a  decided 
Unitarian  in  doctrine  and  practice.  In  doctrine,  because  he 
denies  the  Trinity,  and  the  existence  of  a  Devil.  In  prac- 
tice, because  he  denies  what  he  knows  to  be  true;  that  is,  that 
those,  who,  like  him  and  Mr.  Kneeland,  reject  the  doctrine 
of  a  future  punishment,  are  disqualified  by  the  constitution  of 
the  state,  from  holding  offices  of  trust  or  "profit. 

For  the  Democratic  Press. 
ENDLESS  MISERY  AND  TRINITARIANISM. 

Mr.  Binns.— In  your  paper  of  the  6th  inst.  a  short  communi- 
cation made  its  appearance  under  the  title  of  "  Universalism  and 
Unitarianism,"  which  for  childishness  and  arrogance  exceeds,  iu 
my  humble  opinion,  any  thing  before  presented  to  the  public 
from  the  pen  of  the  self-constituted  champion  of  reputed  ortlio- 
doxy  whose  signature  it  bears.  The  purport  of  the  whole  ap- 
pears to  be  simply  to  inform  the  world  of  the  fact,  that  "  7,  (W. 
L.  M'Calla)  have  been  in  person  to  see  Gen.  La  Fayette:  whilst 
some  others,  less  officious,  or  less  greedy  after  mushroom  popular- 
ity than  myself,  have  not  availed  themselves  of  the  opportunity" 

1 -^I^a/'^^  ^'^"^^  ^^  ^^^  apparent,  yet  it  is  not  the  sole  object 
which  Mr,  M-Calla  had  m  view  in  presenting  the  public  with  this 
!  mportant  item  of  intelligence,  lie  thought  he  had  now  too  good 
an  opportunity  to  let  pass  of  irritating  universalists  and  unitari- 
ans in  a  body,  as  well  as  attempting  to  prejudice  the  public  mind 
against  them  We  have  the  satisfaction,  however,  to  believe, 
that  Mr.  xM'Calla  stands  entirely  alone  in  this  affair,  and  that  no 
sing  e  one  of  the  liberal  minded  clergy  in  this  citv,  nay  of  the 
whole  country,  will  thank  him  for  his  officiousness;  at  this  par- 
ticular time,  in  striving  to  mar  the  reputation  of  those  whose  only 
crxme  is  tliat  their  religious  faith  does  not  exactlv  corresnon'd 
with  his  own.  "'  ' 


hi 

It  is  indcctl  truly  strange  that  Mr.  M'Calla,  on  an  occasion 
■vvliich  called  forth  the  gratitude  of  every  heart,  and  in  the  midst 
of  tiiat  universal  harmony  which  pervaded  all  classes,  sects,  and 
parties,  could  not  have  suppressed  that  spirit  of  maliciousness 
for  which  he  has  on  some  former  occasions  distinguished  himself. 
The  joy  produced  by  the  presence  of  the  illustrious  visitor,  the 
friend  of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  was  pure  and  unmingled,  and 
would  have  remained  uninterrupted,  had  it  not  been  for  the  peev- 
ishness of  a  solitary  individual.  Mr.  M'Calla  stated,  that  they  all 
agreed  "  in  excluding  from  their  procession  those  clergymen 
(falsely  so  called)  who  deny  the  supreme  deity  of  Jesus  Chnst,''&c. 
I  would  ask  who  excluded  them?  ffliy  the  Clergy.  But  did  tlie 
authority  of  the  city,  or  did  General  La  Fayette  himself  exclude 
them.^  Surely  not;  iov  universalists  did  visit  him,  and  he  treated 
them  with  equal  attention  and  respect,  evincing  thereby  that 
nobleness  of  mind  which  has  marked  his  steps  in  every  transac- 
tion of  his  life. 

Universalists  and  unitarians  had  the  same  privilege  of  forming 
a  procession  that  others  had,  and  perhaps  would  have  made  as 
respectable  an  appearance  ('but  for  their  numbers)  as  the  proces- 
sion did,  in  whose  ranks  was  numbered  the  modest  Mr.  M'Calla. 
The  only  sanction  which  Mr.  M'Calla  has  given  for  the  pro- 
ceedings of  which  he  has  borne  so  conspicuous  a  part,  is  the  con- 
duct of  those  whose  faith  accords  with  presbyterians;  but  we  have 
great  reason  to  be  thankful  that  in  this  land  of  freedom  and  in- 
dependence, such  contracted  views  do  not  form  the  standard  by 
%vhich  to  judge  of  a  man's  piety  or  merit.  As  to  his  classing 
universalists  and  atheists  togetlier,  he  has  manifested  either  too 
much  ignorance  or  too  much  wilfulness  to  render  it  worthy  of 
comment.  What  he  has  extracted  from  the  9th  article  of  the 
constitution  of  this  state,  he  as  well  knows  does  not  disqualify 
universalists  from  holding  oflices  of  trust  or  profit,  as  he  does, 
that  many  of  the  civil  officers,  not  only  of  this  state,  but  of  the 
United  States,  are  universalists  and  unitarians.  Before  Mr. 
M  'Calla  boasts  any  more  of  his  having  visited  the  General, 
while  some  others  did  not,  which  privilege  (as  he  ivoidd  insinuate) 
was  denied  them.,  on  account  of  believing  the  doctrine  of  univer- 
salism  or  unitarianism,  I  hope  he  will  have  the  goodness  to  in- 
form the  public  what  qualified  the  most  distinguished  citizens  of 
Boston  and  Cambridge  for  the  company  of  Gen.  La  Fayette.: 
or  what  qualified  the  Hon.  John  Q.  Mams  for  the  General's  so- 
ciety while  he  tarried  in  this  city !  It  will  be  easy  for  all  to  con- 
clude who  know  the  religious  faith  of  the  individuals  to  whom  I 
have  just  alluded,  that  their  qualifications  did  not  consist  in  em- 
bracing  the  rfoc<rmeo/f/t 5  Trinity,  of  their  believing  in  the  exis- 
tence of  the  devil  as  a  '■'•  fallen  angel,^^  nor  of  their  belief  of  the  in- 
terminable torments  of  the  wicked. 
Philad.  Oct.  11,  1824.  WILLIAM  MORSE.   . 


Ivil 


No.  25 
DEBATE  ON  UNIVERSALISM. 


FROM  THE  FRANKLIN  GAZETTE,  OF  OCT.  21, 

Mr.  Norvell  :  As  my  report  of  tlie  late  theological  discussion 
IS  now  completed,  and  will  be  presented  to  the  public  in  a  few 
days,  I  beg  leave  to  trouble  you  with  the  following  remarks,  in 
answer  to  some  of  Mr.  M'Calla's  statements  in  relation  to  me, 
which  appeared  in  your  Gazette  of  the  7th  instant,  presuming 
that  if  I  can  show  that  the  most  prominent  of  his  assertions  are 
not  founded  on  fact,  it  would  only  be  intrusion  to  attempt  to 
prove  that  the  remainder  are  equally  unfounded  and  unjust.  He 
insists,  that  /  was  employed  by  the  Universalist  church  to  report 
the  discussion.  This  is'  not  a  fact.  Had  he  taken  the  pains  to 
have  inquired,  he  ivould  have  found  that  it  was  a  Mr,  Stetson 
who  was  engaged  by  the  church,  which  engagement  Mr.  Stetson 
could  not  fulfil,  in  consequence  of  the  discussion  being  protracted 
longer  than  he  could  remain  in  the  city  ;  or  for  some  other  cause 
to  me  unknown.  J  then,  being  the  only  person  who  had  notes 
of  the  ivhole  of  the  debate,  considered  it  a  duty  I  owed  to  the  pub- 
lic to  publish  my  report  of  it,  knowing  that  it  could  not  be  ob- 
tained from  any  other  source.  Immediately  after  I  had  made 
knoivn  my  intention,  Mr.  M'Calla  appeared  in  your  Gazette, 
and  stated  that  the  work  was  "  wwaw/Aonzerf,"  because,  I  sup- 
pose published  without  his  authority.  I,  in  my  reply  of  August 
7,  stated  that  I  considered  myself  the  reporter  of  neither  Mr. 
Kneeland  nor  Mr.  M'Calla,  not  having  been  engaged  by  either 
of  them  nor  by  any  othtsr  individual  in.  existence,  but  the  report- 
er of  the  public,  whom  alone  I  considered  my  authority  for  pub  ■ 
lishingit.  From  the  purest  motives,  I  undertook  and  have  com- 
pleted the  laborious  task;  namely,  from  a  conscientious  belief 
that  it  will  be  useful  to  the  public^  Had  any  other  person  pos- 
sessed the  materials  for  furnishing  the  report  in  full,  as  I  have 
given  it,  I  should  have  been  glad  to  have  been  freed  fron\  so  un- 
thankful an  office;  for  it  is  well  known  to  those  who  are  in  the 
habit  of  reporting  debates  in  congress,  in  the  state  legislatures, 
or  in  the  houses  of  parliament  in  Great  Britain,  that  speakers 
do  not  always  repay  with  kindness  the  faithful  labours  of  a  re- 
porter. Speakers  are  apt  to  forget  many  things  they  have  stated  j 
the  more  faithful,  therefore,  tlie  reporter  is  in  reporting  expres- 
sions used  by  them  in  the  warmth  ot  debate,  the  less  they  thank 
him  for  his  fidelity,  when,  in  their  cooler  moments,  those  expres- 
'sions  meet  their  eyes,  to  which  their  heads,  I  will  not  say  their 
hearts,  have  given  birth.  The  case  of  Mr.  M'Calla,  then,  is  not 
singular,  he  is  not  the  first  who  has  denied  his  speeches,  nor 
is  it  likely  he  will  be  the  last.  It  is  natural  for  a  man  of  san^ 
guine  temperament,  in  the  warmth  of  argument,  to  use  expres* 

H 


Iviii 

sions  uhich,  on   leflectioii,    lie  uould  perhaps   gladly  expunge 
from  the  reporter's  minutes,:  but  which,  in  this  instance,  are  giv- 
en to  the  world  as  they  were  delivered.     Had  I  been  less  taithfiil, 
it  is  probable  I  should  have  escaped  the  chastening  pen  of  Mr. 
M'Calla;  and,  as  the  author  of  a  little  pamphlet  which  appear- 
ed immediately  after  the  close  of  the  debate,  have  passed  along 
unheeded.     But  Mr.  M'Calla,  as  soon  as  I  made  known  my  in- 
tention of  publishing  my  report,  being  aware  of  the  poivers  of  the 
stenographic  art,  was  determined  to  be  beforehand  with  me;  he 
therefore  endeavoured  to  prejudice  the  public  against  my  report 
by  publicly  denouncing  it  as  "  spurious*'  before   he  had  seen  a 
line  of  it!     It  is  true,  he  has  since  attempted  to  provei\\2d  it  is 
*'  partial,  unsatisfactory  and  spurious;"  but  how?  Not  as  a  can- 
did man  would,  by  pointing  out,  when  requested,  one  or  more  of 
the  real  or  supposed  errors,  as  a  proof  that  he  had  something  t» 
ground  his  assertions  on  :    No!  but  by  telling  the  world  that  I 
am  a  UniversalistI     This,  he  thinks,  is  cjuite  sufficient  to  justify 
himinanv  thing  he  ma}^  be  pleased,  in  the  plenitude  of  his  cha- 
rity, to  ailedge  against  me,   no  matter  how  seriously  it  may  af- 
fect my  interest  or  my  character.     This  proof  of  my  having 
given  an  unfaithful  report  may  do  very  well,  coming  from  Mr. 
M'Calla,  for  the  bigotted,  the  illiterate,  and  the  unthinking  part 
of  the  community;  but  it  will  not  convince  a  man  of  sober  reflec- 
tion ;  for  he  will  see,  immediately,  that  by  pursuing  this  traim 
of  reasoning,  it  would  be  morally  impossible  to  have  a  faithful 
report.     This  debate  was  not  the  aifair  of  a  select  few,  nor  of  a 
party,  but  one  in  which  all  are  interested,  whether  Pagan,  Ma- 
hometan, Jew  or  Christian  ;  and  between  the  two  points  of  con- 
troversy their  is  no  intermediate  belief;  for  every  individual  in 
existence,  if  he  think  at  all  on  the  subject,  believes  that  there  i* 
a  future  state  of  punishment  in  another  world,  or  there  is  not.  As 
I  have  thought  and  examined  a  great  deal  upon  this  subject,   I 
must  necessarily  believe  with  oneorotlier  of  the  two  disputants. 
Suppose  then,  I  believed  with  Mr  .M-Calla,  that  there  is  a'future 
state  of  punishment  in  an  immortal  state;  by  the  very  same  rule 
that  he  attempts  to  prove  that  a  Universalist  can  not  possibly 
give  a  faithful  report,  he  equally  proves  the  utter  impossibility  of 
a  faithful  report  being  given  by  one  who  is  not  a  Universalist,  or 
by  any  other  individual  in  existence. 

Mr.  M'Calla's  reasoning  upon  this  subject,  however,  is  con- 
sistent with  the  system  of  logic  by  whicli  he  can  demonstrate  to 
the  satisfaction  of  any  person,  as  narrow-minded  as  himself,  that 
if  a  universalist  were  to  give  a  loaf  of  bread  t(.'  a  poor  famishing 
fellow  creature  to  keep  him  from  actual  starvation,  or  to  give  him 
a  blanket  in  the  depth  of  winter  to  keep  his  slow  circulating 
blood  from  freezing  in  his  veins;  or  if  he,  as  the  San»aritan  of 
old,  were  to  administer  to  the  wants  of  a  distressed  8>)d  woii'uU.d 
traveller;  in  any  one  of  these  cases,  this  Mr.  M'Ca'ila,  with  a 


lit 

wruly  Levitical  spirit,  would  prove  it  was  a  very  ivicked,  cruel 
action!  Now,  sir,  this  is  not  a  mere  assertion  of  inine;  it  is  what 
he,  who  styles  hiniseli' a  servant  of  God,  a  minister  of  the  meek, 
the  benevolent  Jesus,  has  himself  informed  you.  He  stated  in  Lie 
communication  pf  the  7th  instant,  that  a  (Jniversalist  told  him, 
and  several  others  who  were  present,  that  the  surplus  proceeds  of 
Biy  report  were  to  be  given  for  some  charitable  purpose.  "  rhis 
he,  the  Universalist,  said  by  way  of  recommending  the  book  to 
our  patronage.  Knoiving  that  the  tender  mercies  of  the  ivicked 
are  cruel,  tao  plan  did  not  meet  my  approbationP^  This  is  the  lan- 
guage of  a  "  s'lf-styled"  minister  of  Christ :  I  have  borrowed 
Mr.  M'Calla's  expression  "  self-styled,"  and  now  give  you  my 
authority  for  applying  it  to  him.  The  scriptures  declare  that 
*'  If  a  man  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his."  Has 
the  Spirit  of  Clirist  been  manifested  by  this  revereiul  gentleman, 
in  his  unprovoked  and  unfounded  attempt  to  asperse  my  charac 
ter  as  a  reporter,  without  producing  a  solitary  proof  that  he  had 
any  ot.er  ground  for  it  than  that  I  differed  with  him  in  point  of 
faithj  unless  indeed  it  be,  that  as  he  is  going  to  publish  the  dis- 
cussion himself,  he  wishes  my  book  out  of  the  way,  to  make  room 
for  his  own,  reasoning  as  the  Ambitious  Alexander,  that  as  the 
earth  cannot  bear  two  suns,  neit!.er  can  the  christian  world  bear 
two  books.  This  indeed  may  be  the  sole  cause  of  all  his  spleen, 
but  the  man  who  could  descend  to  such  meanness  to  accomplish 
his  purpose  must  have  an  understanding  as  beclouded  as  his  con- 
science is  depraved.  But  admitting  all  Mr.  M'Calla  has  stated 
about  "conspirations,"  "engaged  reporters,"  and  "deputy 
publishers,"  to  be  true,  what  will  it  amount  to,  if  I  can  prove 
that  my  report  is  fiiithful,  satisfactory  and  impartial?  This  I  shall 
no\y  do,  and  let  the  public  decide  between  mere  assertion  and 
positive  proof.  In  his  communication  of  the  7th  instant,  he  says, 
"  It  is  evident  that  the  first  plan  adopted  by  these  partners  in 
iniquity  was  for  Mr.  Jennings  to  keep  himself  out  of  view,  and 
to  pass  off  their  spurious  minutes  &s  an  authentic  report  approved 
by  the  moderators."  Now  to  shew  how  regardless  this  man  is  of 
truth,  and  of  my  reputation,  I  have  by  particular  request  obtain- 
ed trom  these  very  moderators  certijicates  of  the  correctness  of 
my  report,  which  I  here  insert : 

From  the  Rev.  Br.  Ely. 
At  the  request  of  Mr.  Jennings,  I  would  state,  that  I  have 
not  been  able,  since  the  publication  of  his  "Minutes  of  a  Dis- 
cussion," &c.  to  read  more  than  fifty  pages  of  the  work,  which 
is  less  than  one  sixth  part  of  the  whole.  So  soon  as  [  can  find 
tune  to  read  the  whole,  I  shall  freely  communicate,  at  his  re- 
quest, ray  opinion  of  the  same.  He  does  not  pretend,  in  every 
senteyice,  to  give  the  words  of  the  speakers,  and  therefore  they 
cannot  be  considered  as  responsible  for  any  thing  contained  m 
the  Minutes,  until  they  admit  themselves  to  have  spoken  it,  or 


else  are  proved  to  have  uttered  the  same.  For  my  part,  I  wish 
the  Minutes  may  be  attentively  read,  which  will  prepare  inqui- 
rers tor  the  subsequent  perusal  of  Mr.  M'Calla's  expected  pub- 
lication on  the  controver.sy;  and  for  the  estabUshment  of  their 
ov  n  minds  on  this  important  question,  whether  there  is  any 
punishment  for  impenitent  sinners  after  the  present  life,  or  not  ? 
During  the  debate  of  Tuesday  afternoon,  July  13lh,  I  was  ab- 
sent; so  that  I  can  only  express  an  opinion  on  the  ^rstforti/ 
pageSy  and  the  short  speech  attributed  to  myself,  on  pages  234 
and  235,  concerning  which  I  am  free  to  declare,  that  1  discover 
in  these  forty-t^^  o  paj^es,  so  for  as  my  memory  serves  me,  no 
important  error  or  omission.  I  uttered  more  than  M>.  Jennings 
has  recorded,  and  the  other  speakers  may  have  done  the  same. 
Had  E  attempted,  after  speaking,  to  give  my  own  words,  1  do 
not  know  that  I  should  have  been  literally  and  verbally  accu- 
rate, any  more  than  the  stenographer.  I  did  not  intend  to  con- 
vey the  idea.,  nor  can  I  say  that  Mr.  Jennings  has  attributed  it 
to  mc  that  Iwould  have  no  objection  to  hear  Mr.  Kneeland  preachy 
under  any  circumstances^  wliich  would  imply,  that  I  thought 
him  a  minister  ot  the  gospel,  or  of  the  true  religion;  ybr  7 
would  not,  after  knowing  his  sentiments,  receive  him  into  my 
house  in  the  character  of  a  servant  of  Christ.  As  a  man,  I  will 
shoio  him  any  kindness  in  my  power;  but  I  conceive  myseff 
positively  forbidden  to  countenance  any  one,  in  any  manner,  as 
a  minister  of  the  gospel,  who  brings  an  essentially  different  gos- 
pel from  that  contained  in  the  bible.  After  all,  1  think  the  forty- 
two  pages,  of  which  [  now  give  my  opinion,  as  just  a  statement 
of  what  was  uttered  in  my  hearing,  as  could  be  expected  of  any 
stenographer,  who  should  attempt  to  follow  men  of  ready  ut- 
terance, in  a  debate  of  twenty  hours. 

iZRA  STILES  ELY. 
Philadelphia,  October  12,  1824. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  these  forty  pages,  to  the  correct- 
ness of  which  the  doctor  has  certified,  contain  the  greater  part 
ot  those  very  three  speeches  and  a  fragm.ent  of  a  speech  attri- 
buted to  W.  L  M'Calla,  and  which  he  in  the  Gazette  in  the 
most  positive  terms  disowned  !  The  speech  of  Dr,  Ely,  havings 
nothing  to  do  with  the  argument,  I  did  not  attempt  to  give  in  full 
as  delivered,  but  have  merely  given  an  outline  of  it,  and  this  i 
submitted  to  the  doctor  for  his  correction,  before  I  sent  it  to  the 
press ;  the  only  alteration  he  made  was  substituting  week-day 
for  any  day  in  the  week:  yet  this  outline  of  his  speech,  cor- 
rected and  approved  by  himself,  Mr.  M'Calla  calls  "an  in- 
vented address,"  which  I  put  into  the  mouth  of  one  of  the 
moderators !  Let  him  settle  this  point  with  Dr.  Ely  and  his  own 
conscience.  As  to  the  correctness  of  the  remainder  of  the 
report,  I  beg  leave  to  present  you  with  the  following  certifi- 


cates,  though  I  am  fully  aware  they  do  not  agree  with  the  un- 
foanded  assertions  of  Mr.  MTalla,  nor  will  they  "  go  clearly  to 
prove  that  this  man  is  essenliall)'  deficient  in  skill,  or  in  inte- 
grity as  a  reporter,"  as  the  truly  christian  spirited  Mr.  M'Lalla 
basely  insinuated  in  his  last  communication.  The  following 
have  been  selected  from  those  received. — 

From  the  reverend  William  Hogan,  late  pastor  of  St.  Mary's 
Church.   South   Fourth-street,    and   the  reverend    William 
Morse,  pastor  of  the  Second  Universalist  Church,  Callowhill- 
street. 
To  the  public. 

We,  the  subscribers,  hereby  certify,  that  we  have  examined 
the  "Minutes"  of  the  "Theological  Discussion"  between  the 
rererend  Abner  Kneeland  and  the  reverendWilliam  L.  M'Calla, 
which  were  taken  in  short  hand  by  Mr.  R.  L.  Jennings,  and,  in 
our  opinion,  they  contain  a  true  and  faithful  report  of  that  dis- 
cussion, without  any  omissions  or  additions  affecting  the  argu- 
ments of  either  of  the  disputants. 

WILLIAM  HOGA?f, 
WILLIAM  MORSE, 
Philadelphia,  October  13, 1824.  Moderators. 

Certificate  from  the  reverend  Abner  Kneeland,  pastor  of  the 
first    Independent  Church   of    Christ,   called   Universalist, 
Lombard-street. 
Having  carefully  examined  the  report  of  the  late  "Discus- 
sion" between  the  reverend  William  L.  M'Calla  and  myself,  as 
taken  in  short  hand  and  published  by  Mr.  Jennings,   I  hereby 
certify,  that  the  arguments  are  essentially  the  same  as  delivered 
by  us,  in  all  their  parts,  together  with  the  style  and  manner  in 
which  they  were  delivered:  and  although  in  many  places  I  can 
perceive  some  verbal  difference,  yet,   as  far  as   my   memory 
serves  me,  there  is  nothing  added  or  omitted  ivhich  in  any  man- 
ner affects  the  arguments  on  either  side. 

ABNER  KNEELAND. 
Philadelphia,  October  16th,  1824. 

Certificate  from  D.  Francis  Condie,  M.  D. 
Mr.  R.  L.  Jennings, 

Dear  sir — I  received  your  request  this  morning,  and  in  reply, 
beg  leave  to  state,  that  1  attended  during  the  whole  of  the  dis- 
cussion between  the  reverend  A.  Kneeland  and  reverend  W.  L. 
M'Calla,  on  the  subject  of  the  punishment  for  sin,  part  of 
which  I  myself  took  down  :  I  have  perused  with  attention  your 
"Minutes"  of  that  discussion,  as  published;  and  have  the  plea- 
sure of  certifying  to  their  correctness.  You  have  not  orly 
presented  every  argument  offered  on  both  sides  of  the  question, 


1« 

but,  what  is  always  a  difficult  task,  hare  retained  in  the  report 
the  peculiar  style  of  each  party,  and  most  generally  theW  very 
words.  I  may  further  add,  that  those  with  whom  I  have  con- 
versed, in  relation  to  the  work,  as  well  those  who  oppose  a« 
those  who  believe  in  the  doctrine  held  by  the  Universalist 
Churches,  have  all  borne  testimony  to  its  correctness. 

Yours,  D    FRANCIS  COISDIE. 

South  Fifth-street,  October  13th,  1«?4. 

The  reverend  Dr.  Wylie,  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  Ele- 
venth-street, has  given  me  permission  to  certify  to  the  following 
effect- 
That  from  motives  of  curiosity  rather  than  approbation,  he 
attended  at  the  church  in  Lombard-street,  during  tlie  debate 
between  the  reverend  Abner  Kneeland  and  the  reverend  W.  L. 
M'Calla,  three  times,  in  the  whole  about  two  hours  and  a  half, 
and  although  he  has  seen  in  the  public  papers,  that  the  report  is 
not  acknowledged  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  M'C'alla  to  be  correct,  yet 
truth  obliges  him  to  declare,  that  he  can  not  discover  the 
least  difference,  even  in  expression,  between  what  is  contained 
in  the  report  and  what  he  heard  delivered  by  the  speakers  when 
at  church. 

More  certificates  of  the  correctness  of  the  report  have  been 
received,  but  the  above,  it  is  presumed,  will  be  considered 
fully  satisfactory.  R.  L.  JEN  N  INGS. 

I  have  trespassed,  sir,  largely  upon  your  columns,  and  upon 
the  patience  of  your  readers,  but  it  is  with  the  hope  that  tiiis 
is  the  last  time  that  I  shall  trouble  you  on  this  subject,  for  Mr. 
M'Calla  must  convince  me  that  the  ears  of  those  gentlemen, 
who  have  certified  to  the  correctness  of  my  report,  though 
perhaps  not  so  long  as  his  own,  are  not  capable  of  receiving 
sounds,  and  their  memories  not  capable  of  retaining  them, 
before  I  shall  consider  myself  under  any  necessity  of  answering 
any  more  of  his  publications,  having  here  given  sufficient  proof  to 
satisfy  any  unprejudiced  mind  of  the  correctness  of  my  report, 
and  it  is  presumed  that  even  Mr.  M'Calla,  wide  as  he  ranges  in  the 
field  of  bare  assertion,  will  not  feel  himself  at  liberty  to  state  that 
the  respectable  members  of  his  own  church,  or  the  others, 
whose  integrity  is  equally  unquestionable,  are  my  partners  in 
iniquity,  nor  that  they  have  given  their  names  to  aid  in  '*  pass- 
ing off  spurious  minutes  as  an  authentic  report.''  But  if  he 
should  be  disposed  to  say  so,  let  his  future  communications  be 
addressed  to  them,  and  not  indirectly  to 

Yours  respectfully,  R.  L.  JENNINGS. 


Ixiii 
No.  26. 

J-KOM    THE    FRANKLIN    GAZETTE,    OF  OOT.   23. 

DEBATE  ON  UNIVERSALISM. 

Although  there  was  no  reason,  from  the  beginning,  to  hope  that 
such  a  character  as  Mr.  Jennings  would  make  a  fair  report  of  my 
argument  as  far  as  it  went^  my  apprehensions  on  this  subject 
Were  not,  to  the  best  of  my  recollection,  publicly  expressed  until 
after  his  first  number  made  its  appearance :  yet  he  has  repeated- 
ly published  that  Mr.M'Calla  "denounced  the  report  altogether^" 
*'before  he  saw  it,"  "  before  he  saw  a  line  of  it."  This  is  the 
burthen  of  his  song  in  yesterday's  Gazette.  Mr.  Kneeland  also 
has  published  that  I  denounced  the  vit^ovidi%  altogether  spurious. 
Some  of  their  followers  have  taken  this  for  granted,  and  used  it 
with  that  industry  which  might  be  expected.  Mr.  Kneeland  and 
Mr,  Jennings  refer,  I  suppose,  to  a  communication  for  the  Frank- 
lin Gazette  of  August  5,  a  few  days  before  the  appearance  of  the 
first  number.  In  this  I  said  that  I  was,  "  contrary  to  a  written 
agreement,  compelled  to  a  preiiiature  close,  and  afterwards  de- 
nied an  opportunity  of  finishing.'*  For  this  reason,  his  intended, 
and  as  yet  unseen  work,  is  called  a  spurious  production.  This  is 
done  in  a  note  with  express  reference  to  what  had  gone  before. 
Although  Mr.  Jennings  has  said  that  I  denounced  it  altogether., 
and  Mr.  Kneeland  as  altogether  spurious.,  this  is  wholly  without 
foundation.  The  word  altogether  was  added  by  themselves, 
contrary  to  my  plain  meaning.  It  has  been  already  shown  that 
Mr.  Kneeland  wrote  something  much  more  serious  than  this 
over  my  name,  without  my  knowledge  or  permission.  I  hope 
soon  to  show  that  Mr.  Jennings  is  his  promising  disciple.  U 
either  of  these  persons  were  to  issue  proposals  for  publishino-  a 
complete  "Sew  Testament,  while  yet  they  intended  to  omit  what 
they  call  the  disputed  books,  and  many  chapters  and  verses  of 
other  books,  I  should,  after  such  information,  pronounce  it  a  spu- 
rious production,  without  waiting  to  see  it.  I  would  not  call  it 
altogether  spurious,  because  I  could  not  tell  whether  it  might  not 
be  genuine  as  far  as  it  went.  But  these  Universalist  preachers 
would  think  it  quite  justifiable  to  alter  my  expressions  until  they 
would  answer  their  purpose.  They  intended  to  publish  for  my 
whole  argument  what  I  knew,  and  what  they  knew,  to  be  only  a 
part.  This  would  injure  its  integrity  as  much  as  if  they  were  to 
corrupt  it  by  interpolations.  I  therefore  pronounced  it  spurious, 
and  gave  this  as  a  reason.  This  was  correct  in  language,  and 
true  in  fact.  The  community  understood  my  meaning,  and  so 
did  those  who  perverted  my  words. 

Mr.  Kneeland  pretends  that  Mr.  Jennings  is  the  sole  publisher 
of  these  Minutes,  without  being  in  the  least  under  his  control. 
Suppose  that  I  Aad  denounced  it  as  altogether  spurious,  without 


Ixiv 

seeing  it.  Would  not  this  be  as  justifiable  as  for  him  to  pro- 
nounce it  altogether  genuine  without  seeing  it?  And  yet  this  he 
did  in  the  National  Gazette  of  July  23,  by  promising,  on  his 
own  responsibility,  before  he  read  the  work,  that  the  public 
should  be  furnished  with  ?/<e  real  discussion  in  fulL  A  faux  pas 
of  this  description,  in  an  orthodox  minister,  is  of  suchfiiaportance 
that  he  must  be  declared  guilty  even  when  innocent;  but  in  Mr. 
Kneeland  it  is  a  matter  of  as  little  consequence  as  a  speck  of  dirt 
on  a  climbing-boy.  Some  of  those  who  have  been  most  clamor- 
ous against  me,  for  a  supposed  premature  condemnation  of  a 
work  really  corrupt,  see  no  fault  in  my  opponent  for  a  prema- 
ture and  unqualified  approbation  of  the  same  work. 

The  plan  upon  which  this  report  was  conducted  is  perhaps  as 
fexceptionable  as  the  execution.  The  author  has  insinuated  thaf 
there  was  some  prospect  of  his  becoming  a  reporter  to  congress. 
Would  they  be  satisfied  it  he  would  give  nothing  but  their  ar- 
gument? Would  Randolph,  Clay  and  Webster  wish  their 
thoughts  clothed  in  the  language  of  Mr.  R.  L.  Jennings?  Yet  he 
would  persuade  us  that  this  is  his  privilege  as  a  reporter.  On 
the  cover  of  No.  1,  he  requests  us  to  note  only  errors  "affecting 
the  argument."  On  the  cover  of  No.  3,  he  acknowledges  that 
he  had  omitted  certain  ridiculous  words  of  Mr.  Kneeland,  of 
which  a  hearer  of  the  debate  reminded  him;  yet  he  says,  "I  con- 
sider myself  only  bound  to  acknowledge  errors  which  may  be 
pointed  out,  affecting  the  argument^  on  either  side."  On  this 
plan,  a  stenographer  once  reported  a  four  hours'  speech  of  an 
eminent  minister  in  this  city,  in  such  a  compass  as  could  be 
read  in  fifteen  minutes.  What  he  did  not  understand  he  left 
out;  and  what  he  thought  he  understood,  he  recorded  in  a  man- 
ner so  shamefully  distorted  that  the  speaker  submitted  to  the 
mortifying  drudgery  of  correcting  the  manuscript  to  keep  him 
from  publishing  things  in  his  name  whicti  would  be  a  reproach  to 
religion. 

If  the  reporter  be  allowed  to  give  his  judgment  of  the  argu- 
ment instead  of  the  words  of  the  Speaker,  it  is  evident  that  the 
character  of  the  speech  must  be  formed,  not  by  the  sentiments  of 
its  author,  nor  by  his  ability  in  defending  them,  but  by  the  re- 
porter's knowledge  of  language,  skill  in  reasoning,  and  talents 
and  experience  in  composition.  A  man  of  ingenuity  could  clothe 
a  poor  argument  with  a  plausible  dress,  and  vice  versa.  As  Mr. 
Jennings  is  now  one  of  Mr.  Kneeland's  preachers,  he  probably 
thinks  himself  eminently  qualified  in  this  respect.  He  may 
even  suppose  that  1  owe  him  as  polite  a  bow  as  Pope  gave  to 
Warburton  for  expressing  his  meaning  better  than  he  could  do  it 
himself.  Mr.  Kneeland  may  perhaps  give  it  as  a  fourth  evi- 
dence of  an  unsound  mind,  that  I,  with  such  moderate  claims, 
prefer  my  own  speeches  to  a  set  of  (J  niversalist  harangues  man-- 
ufaclured  forme  by  a  student  of  his. 


Upon  this  plan  of  running  one  man's  defence  in  the  mould  of 
another,  it  is  evident  that  its  character  must  oe,  in  a  i^reat  mea- 
sure^ formed  by  the  reporter's  creed,  as  well  as  his  talents.  Tliis 
made  Mr.  K.neeland  pervert  many  of  my  arguments,  and  mis- 
state many  of  my  declarations  during  the  debate.  It  has  made 
him  often  insinuate,  and  even  expressly  assert,  that  my  defence 
had  no  argument  at  all.  In  his  letter  of  August  2,  he  tells  me 
that  I  had  uisspent/owr  days,  and  ''probably  might  continue  a 
month  in  the  same  way,  and,  after  all,  to  no  purpose."  It  is,  I 
believe,  the  general  opinion  of  men  of  piety  and  good  sense,  that 
a  strong  and  unanswerable  argument  may  be  drawn  from  the  case 
of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarusj  yet  Mr.  Kneeland  said  that  "it 
has  no  bearing  on  the  subject  in  debate  "  In  another  place,  he 
says,  "  But  as  I  before  observed,  I  do  not  view  it  as  having  any 
bearing upan  the  suojectin  discussion  whatever.''  Again,  "there- 
fore, I  say  that  the  account  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus  appears 
to  me  to  have  no  relation  to  the  subject  of  future  happiness  or 
misery  whatever."  He  called  my  defence  '''a  continued  series 
of  quotations,  unthout  any  argument,  to  prove  the  meaning 
which  was  attached  to  them."'  In  another  place  he  calls  it  "  bare 
assertion  without  proof  or  even  ar^M/nen^."  When  ;VJr.  Knee- 
land,  regardless  of  my  words,  gives  this  account  of  my  ar;i;ument 
what  sort  of  a  report  are  we  to  expect  from  his  employed  stenog- 
rapher, when  professedly  disregarding  my  words,  and  giving 
what  he  chooses  to  call  my  argument.^ 

'  This  plan  is  not  only  inconsistent  with  candor,  but  contrary 
to  Mr.  Jennings's  express  engagements  to  the  public.  In  his 
communication  for  the  Franklin  Gazette,  of  August  7,  he  says, 
"  now,  Mr.  P^ditor,  I  propose  publishing  both  of  their  argu- 
ments in  full,  and  together,  as  they  were  delivered.'"  He  did 
this  because  he  considered  the  debate  public  property,  as  he  says, 
"  so  soon  as  the  words  escaped  the  lips  of  the  speakers."  He 
says,  "  I  am  accountable  to  the  disputants  and  to  society  for 
any  thing  I  may  add  or  detract  from  what  was  said."  After 
this  declaration,  a  member  of  that  society,  to  which  he  is  ac- 
countable, shews  him  wherein  he  has  detracted  from  "  what  was 
said;^^  and  receives  for  answer  that  the  reporter  is  "  only  bound 
to  acknowledge  errors  which  may  be  pointed  out,  affecting  the 
argument.''''  As  Universalists  consider  the  case  of  the  rich  man 
and  Lazarus,  and  indeed  most  other  scriptural  pr.>ofs,  as  having 
no  bearing  upon  the  subject,  the  reporter  has  only  to  view  them 
as  not  affecting  the  argument,  and  then  dispose  of  them  as  he 
pleases,  without,  in  his  view,  detracting  from  what  ivas  said ! 
Is  this  catching  the  words,  as  they  "escaped  the  lips  of  the 
speakers.^"  He  did  not  promise  my  ar  uments  in  a  mutilated 
form,  but  "  in  full;"  he  did  not  promise  them  as  manufactured 
by  an  Universalist,  but  "  as  they  wei'e  delivered." 

I 


On  the  covtM-  of  Mr.  Jentungs's  last  numljer,  he  can  imagine 
no  other  reason  for  my  condemning  his  Report,  than  that  Mr. 
M'Calla  "•  intends  publishing  the  discussion  himself  !•'  As  it  is 
probable  that  the  fear  of  rivalshipin  the  money-making  business 
has  excited  alarm,  let  him  know  that  it  was  not  for  money  that 
I  faced  Mr.  Kneeland  before  an  audience,  and  it  is  for  a  much 
higher  object  that  I  hope  to  meet  him  in  the  press.  Although  1 
have  been  at  some  expense,  and  it  is  lawful  and  honorable  to 
seek  an  honest  compensation  for  my  labour,  my  publication  is 
not  to  reimburse  the  one  or  reward  the  other.  If  God  enable 
me  to  accomplish  it,  I  hope  to  see  an  edition  of  two  or  three  thous- 
and copies  About  twenty -five  supernumerary  copies,  not  one 
of  which  shouhl  be  sold,  would  satisfy  my  cupidity.  This  is  all 
the  profit  that  I  claim.  Except  these,  the  profits  of  the  whole 
edition,  whether  great  or  small,  are  to  be  appropriated  to  the 
funds  of  the  Voung  Men's  Domestic  Missionary  Society,  in  this 
place.  That  this  maybe  done  in  good  faith,  the  pecuniary  con- 
cerns of  the  publication,  shall  be  committed  to  other  hands.  A* 
this  public  declaration  is  necessary  to  obviate  groundless  surmise, 
and  to  inform  purchasers  that  they  will  be  feeding  the  poor,  and 
not  enriching  me,  it  is  hoped  that  it  is  not  an  ostentation  of 
charity,  in  which  grace  I  acknowledge  with  undissembled  shame 
Hiy  inferiority  to  many  brethren. 

In  the  place  above  referred  to,  Mr.  Jennings  expresses  serious 
apprehensions  that  I  mean  to  avail  myself  of  his  Minutes  in  aid 
of  my  work.  His  lears  are  entirely  vain.  I  would  not  copy 
such  a  mass  of  error  and  nonsense  for  ti  afold  his  profits.  Does 
he  suppose  that  there  is  such  a  dearth  of  evidence,  that  we  have 
to  resort  1o  a  publication  in  which  the  wrong  side  is  defended  by 
one  Universalist,  and  the  right  side  by  another.^  Durirg  the 
whole  debate,  I  knew  not  that  there  was  such  a  man  as  Mr.  R. 
L.  Jennings  in  the  world.  If  I  did  not  need  his  aid  in  speaking, 
I  hope  to  write  without  him. 

But  he  thinks  me  incapable  of  writing  the  discussion,  because 
I  took  no  notes  of  what  Mr.  Kneeland  said,  and  paid  but  little 
attention  to  his  speeches.  A  correct  copy  of  the  real  discussion 
"would  be  a  verjf  difterent  book  from  that  of  Mr.  Jennings.  But 
this  is  not  my  object.  I  repeatedly  declared  that  Mr.  Kneeland 
liad  not  (tone  justice  tohis  cause;  and  that  if  permitted  to  finish 
the  materials  in  my  hands,  I  would  engage  to  lay  before  the  au- 
dience a  better  defence  of  Universalisra  than  he  had  given.  To 
confine  my  attention,  then,  to  what  he  has  said,  or  what  he  can 
say,  would  be  a  virtual  refusal  to  meet  the  controversy  in  that 
stage  to  which  it  has  advanced,  and  would  disappoint  the  expec- 
tations of  the  public.  Besides  this,  Mr.  Kneeland  and  Mr. 
Jennings  are  very  anxious  that  I  should  confine  my  attention  to 
Mr,  Kneeland's  flimsy  sophisms,  tedious  repetitions,  and  mourn- 


xvu 


tul  complaints,  uttered  during  the  debate,  that  be  may  still 
boast  tliat  the  writings  ot  his  favorite,  IVJr,  Ballon,  of  Hartford 
memory,  remain  unanswered.  In  a  spurious  edition  of  Buck's 
'i'heological  Dictionary,  which  has  been,  in  no  small  deii^ree, 
defiled  by  Mr.  Kneelauii's  fingers,  he  boasts,  concerning  those 
productions  and  his  own  lectures,  that  "  these  works  have 
never  been  answered,  altliough  some  of  them,  particularly  the 
two  first,  [Ballou  on  Atonement  and  his  notes  on  parables,] 
have  i)eet>  published  about  twenty  years  and  liave  gone  through 
several  editions." 

Mr.  Kneeland  suppressed  a  part  of  my  defence  in  his  "  own 
desk,"  as  he  calls  tue  Lombard-street  establishment,  and  Mr. 
Jennings  seems  exceed mgly  anxious  that  it  may  be  suppressed 
forever.  He  appears  to  th.nk  that  for  me  to  print  more  than 
Lis  master  gave  me  leave  to  speak,  would  belong  ralher  to  the 
licentiousness  than  lo  the  liberty  of  the  press.  This  is  perfectly 
in  character.  For,  while  infidelity  boasts  of  its  free-thmivi;;g, 
and  heresy,  of  its  liberality,  they  have  always  endeavoured,  when 
they  had  it  in  their  power,  to  suppress  free  intjuiry.  It  is  er- 
ror in  fact,  and  not  true  religion  that  is  in  danger,  under  the  free- 
dom of  our  iiappy  institution^^. 

Among  all  Mr.  Jennings's  insinuations,  it  is  pleasing  to  ob- 
serve that  he  had  not  the  temerity  to  assert  that  I  had  not  tiie 
means  of  writing  my  own  argument,  especially  as  he  ould 
have  been  contradicted  by  his  own  employer.  In  his  own  re- 
port  Mr.  Kneeland  s  tys  that  his  opponent  "  had  his  matter 
ready  cut  and  dried  to  m*.et  him;"  tuat  he  had  "  not  only  the 
outlines,  but  the  very  body  of  his  argument  completely  pre- 
pared before  he  came  to  the  controversy ;"  •'  that  on  his  part 
tlie  discussion  was  completely  prepared,  in  all  its  parts,  before 
he  came  into  this  house."  As  Mr.  Kneeland  has  revised  Mr. 
Jennings's  Minutes,  and  declared  them  "  as  faithful  a  report 
as  ever  was  made,"  we  shall  allow  the  authenticity  of  what  is 
there  said  in  his  name,  whether  it  was  said  during  the  debate  or 
not.  He  has  had  a  full  opportunity  of  improving  his  argument, 
and  exerting  his  utmost  strength.  To  his  reasoning,  as  thus 
published,  due  attention  may  be  given,  at  the  same  time  that 
the  arguments  of  Messrs.  Ballou,  Balfour  and  Chauncey, 
Winchester  and  Huntingdon,  Kelly  and  Murray,  shall  be  dis- 
played to  the  best  advantage,  according  to  my  feeble  abilities. 

Hie  concession  which  Mr.  Kneeland  has  made,  of  his  oppo- 
nent's  having  *'  not  only  the  (mtUne  but  the  very  body  of  his  argw 
meut"  '*  coinpletely  prepared  in  all  its  parts,^'  proves  not  only 
that  I  have  the  means  of  writing  for  myself,  but  the  means  of 
exposing  Mr=  Jennings's  garbled  report^    This  task  is  under- 


ixviii 

talren  for  the  purpose  of  defending  the  trutb  and  detecting  cor- 
ruption, not  to  obstruct  the  circulation  of  his  work;  for  it  may 
do  good,  since  he  has  retained  some  ot  my  scrijHure  proofs, 
notwithstanding  all  his  unfairness.  Neither  do  I  undertake  to 
point  out  all  the  errors  of  the  work,  for  that  would  be  to  cor- 
rect almost  every  line  which  it  contains.  It  is  true,  there  is  a 
resemblance  between  my  speeches  and  those  which  be  has  made 
for  me;  and  so  there  is  between  a  portrait  and  a  caricature,  or 
bet^^e^n  a  living  animal  and  a  dead  animal ;  but  as  a  living  dog 
is  better  than  a  dead  lion,  so  is  an  extemporaneous  defence, 
fairly  reported,  preferable  to  that  which  Mr.  Jennings  has  as- 
cribed to  mc  as  the  product  ol  laborious  preparation.  This 
may  he  illustrated  by  a  reference  to  a  passage  ii\  which  he  has 
actually  killed  a  verv  useful  animal  which  was  mentioned  in  my 
retort  upon  m^  opponent  for  endeavoring  to  expose  my  pro- 
nunciation to  contempt  and  ridicule.  After  speaking  of  hearing 
a  French  gentleman  pronounce  the  Latiji,  1  asked  among  other 
things,  "  should  I  prick  up  my  ears,  as  Sterne,  in  his  Sentimen- 
tal Journey,  says  an  ass  does,  at  every  new  object  that  he  sees?" 
Here,  no  doubt,  Mr.  Jennings  tried  his  stenographical  skill; 
and  you  have  the  product  of  it  in  an  erratum  on  the  back  of  No. 
4.  It  is  as  follows:  "  Should  I  have  understood  bim  as  Sterne, 
in  his  Sentime'  tal  Journey,  understcod  the  owner  of  the  dead 
ass,  by  the  accent  of  his  apostrophe  to  it?"  Man^  impartial 
persons,  like  Drs.  E\j  and  Wylie,  would,  from  inattention  and 
forgetfuiness,  think  this  a  fair  report.  There  is  a  manifest  re- 
semblance between  the  original  and  the  copy.  The  likeness  is 
at  least  as  great  as  that  which  subsists  between  a  man  and  a 
monkey.  The  same  species  of  animal  is  mentioned  b^  me,  and 
reported  by  bim.  There  is  this  difference,  however,  that  while 
the  beast  was  in  my  care,  he  was  a  living  travelling  ass,  pos- 
sessed of  vivacity  enough  to  start  at  every  strange  sight,  as  Mr. 
Kneeland  started  at  every  pronunciation  except  bis  own.  But 
no  sooner  does  he  pass  out  of  my  hands,  than  this  short-hand  re- 
porter makes  short  » ork  of  him;  and  finishes  him  more  efiec- 
tually  with  a  single  stroke  of  bis  pen,  than  his  father  Balaam 
could  by  the  repeated  strokes  of  his  staff 

This  is  the  way  in  which  he  has  treated  my  whole  array  of 
argument  and  satire.  Whatsoever  animation  tbe\  had  in  my 
hands,  they  are  as  tame  as  a  troop  of  dead  asses  in  his  manage- 
ment. He  has  not  done  justice,  nor  any  thing  like  justice,  to  my 
language,  composition,  sentiments,  facts  or  arguments.  In  his 
report,  my  language  is  low,  swaggering,  and  even  spiced  with 
profanity:  and  no  wonder,  'Or  it  is  that  of  a  universalist.  My 
composition  is  vulgar,  confused,  incoherent,  and  as  unintelligi- 
ble as  the  above  expression  about  "  the  owner  of  the  dead  ass 


with  the  accent  of  his  apostrophe  to  it."  This  is  not  wonder- 
ful, siuoe  it  is  the  composition  of  an  untutored  yoinif;  man,  full 
of  prejn  ice,  and  just  comiiiencing  a  profession  tor  which  he  is 
not  qualifiid.  He  has  attribute<!  to  njcsf-nlimenlsand  ta(;ts  which 
are  talse  in  theniielvei!',  and  which  1  never  believed  nor  uttered. 
Is  it  to  be  expected,  then,  that  he  is  a  competent  judge  of  what 
does  and  what  does  not  affect  my  argument?  Atter  casting  my 
words  to  the  wind,  as  he  has  done,  a  suund  argument  in  Savour 
of  that  trutli  which  he  hates,  can  be  no  nioie  appreciated  by 
him  than  by  his  little  theologian  at  his  dhow. 

As  the  task  of  ex  imining  such  n  mass  of  perversion  is  the 
more  disagreeable  the  longer  it  is  protracted,  1  shall  not  take 
time  to  detail  the  many  false  constructions  of  my  meaning 
which  he  has  substituted  for  my  expressions,  f^ either  will  I 
notice  many  of  his  supplements  to  my  quotations,  in  which  he 
makes  me  appear  vtry  fooiish,  by  quoting  a  great  deal  of  scrip- 
ture for  nie,  where  1  quoted  only  a  few  words,  and  where  a  tew 
were  required  by  perspicuity,  and  candour  required  no  more. 

Numerous  glaring  interpolations  also  have  greatly  enervated 
the  argument  and  stultified  its  author.  In  two  or  three  cases  he 
has  quoted  texts  for  nie  which  appeared  quite  relevant.:  as  Ez« 
18:  20,  2t,  in  page  39.  This  is  true  also  of  Matth.  13:  11,  12, 
in  page  38.  But  he  there  adds  the  15th  verse,  which  is  irrele- 
vant. Isa.  65:  13,  which  he  has  given  me  in  page  113.  would  do 
very  well  if  he  had  put  it  among  tlie  contrasts:  but  it  is  inserted 
where  it  has  nothing  to  do-  These  two  last  texts,  which  I  never 
quoted,  I  now  add  to  my  notes.  John,  2:  14,  in  page  262,  is 
irrelevant.  In  page  51,  he  has  given  me  a  half  a  dozen  verses 
of  John's  Revelation,  in  the  same  way.  Also  four  verses  of  1 
Cor.  in  page  63;  and  in  page  131,  he  lias  interpolated  John  8; 
24:  In  page  67,  he  inserted  fifteen  verses  from  Matt,  and  re- 
ferred to  a  dozen  more  in  Luke,  about  which  I  said  nothing 
there.  In  page  131,  he  makes  me  talk  about  Greek  and  doc- 
trinal parallels  without  any  meaning.  In  page  126,  he  makes 
me  quote  the  Greek  of  Matt.  24:  3,  to  show  the  meaning  of  a 
Hebrew  word.  This,  however,  is  not  more  outrageous  than  his 
putting  into  my  mouth  that  interpretation  of  Matthew's  words 
which  iJnitarians  adopt,  and  which  I  abhor.  In  the  same  heret- 
ical spirit;  he  has,  in  page  132,  made  me  speak  foolishly,  falsely 
and  irreverently  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  and  to  approve  of 
Mr.  Kneeland's  erroneous  translation  of  a  Hebrew  phrase, 
in  page  153.  The  descant  on  regeneration,  which  he  has  com- 
posed for  me  in  page  144,  appears  like  a  parable  in  the  mouth  of 
afool.  In  page  202,  he  does  not  say  that  I  attributed  inspira- 
tion to  Mr.  Kneeland,  but  this  would  not  have  been  more  incon- 
sistent with  truth  than  to  make  me  speak  of  "seventy  inspired 


ixx 

translators;"  or  to  make  me  promise,  as  in  page  98,  that  I  would 
not  quote  from  Mr.  Kneeland's  Lectures  any  more. 

Perhaps  Mr.  Jennings  thought  that  his  many  additions  on  the 
one  hand,  might  be  balanceii  bj  his  many  suppressions  on  the 
other.  In  the  latter,  as  well  as  the  former,  he  has  exercised  a 
prudent  discrimination.  While  he  manages  my  speeches  so  as 
to  make  them  savor  of  idiocy,  he  takes  care  to  suppress  Mr. 
Kneeland's  puerile  display  of  the  new  coat  of  his  miniature  testa- 
ment; which,  by  the  by,  is  not  near  half  as  small,  nor  as  hand- 
some, as  one  belonging  to  his  despised  opponent,  who  never 
thought  of  showing  his  toys.  Neither  did  he  tell  us  how  many 
languages  Mr.  Kneeland  could  read,  and  how  many  he  could  not 
read  for  want  of  lexicons  and  grammars!  Neither  did  he  tell  us  in 

fmge  162,  that  besides  Mr.  Kneeland's  "appeal  to  all  and  every 
earned  person  present,"  he  challenged  the  city  of  Philadelphia 
after  his  accustomed  fashion.  In  the  same  page  he  has  suppress- 
ed Mr.  Kneeland's  declaration  that  the  Hebrew  expression  in 
Daniel  xii.  3,  was  the  same  as  that  in  Psalms  ix.  5,  and  that  the 
conjunction  and  should  be  supplied  in  the  latter,  because  it  was 
found  written  in  the  former.  To  be  consistent,  he  has  jugulated 
my  triumphant  refutation  of  this  sophistry  in  page  173.  To 
make  amends  for  this,  however,  he  has  made  me  say  in  page  153, 
that  the  very  expression  used  in  the  Greek  in  Isaiah,  is  also  used 
in  Daniel  xii.  2.  After  fabricating  this  statement  for  me,  he 
takes  occasion  to  contradict  it  in  a  learned  Greek  note.  An 
anonymous  writer  in  the  Democratic  Press,  whom  I  know  not, 
but  whose  fidelity  should  excite  a  blush  in  some  of  Mr.  Jen- 
nings's ordained  and  graduated  witnesses,  seems  astonished  that 
in  these  days  a  man  can  write  Greek  before  he  can  read  it,  and 
asks,  whence  hath  this  man  letters  ?  Mr.  Jennings  very  sagacious- 
ly refers  him  to  his  little  theologian,  a  little  family  dog,  to  solve 
the  enigma.  Our  saviour  and  the  apostles  had  a  knowledge  of 
languages  by  miracle,  but  not  from  such  a  quarter. 

On  the  cover  of  No.  6,  Mr.  Jennings  informs  us  with  some  em- 
phasis, that  he  was  the  only  one  who  "  took  notes  during  the 
t<;Ao/eof  the  debate."  Yet  in  page  169,  he  tells  us,  ''sometning 
is  here  wanting.''  The  same  anonymous  writer  who  con- 
victed him  of  another  omission  in  the  same  page,  has  reminded 
him  of  suppressing  the  following  expression  of  Mr.  Kneeland, 
viz:  "  I  observe  the  audience  only  hiss  and  clap  when  my  oppo- 
nent is  up,  and  are  silent  when  1  am  up,  which  1  presume  istrom 
respect  to  me !"  In  page  288,  he  has  taken  no  notice  of  his  in- 
terrupting me,  and  of  the  colloquy  which  ensued  upon  the  point 
whether  it  was  of  any  use  for  me  to  prosecute  my  investigation 
of  the  word  everlasting  and  its  conjugates,  since  he  admitted 
their  uniform,  unlimited  meaning,  for  which  I  was  contend- 
ing. In  page  300,  he  has  suppressed  the  words  of  Rom.  xvi.  11, 
and  my  real  comment  upon  them.    From  my  fifteen  affirmative 


Ixxi 

texts,  beginning  on  page  US,  he  has  dropped  an  half  dozen,  and 
several  others  tVom  my  argument  on  the  will  of  God,  page  280. 
When  he  does  this,  he  often  tills  up  with  texts  of  his  own.  This 
is  the  case  in  what  he  has  said  for  me  on  everlasting  and  such 
words,  where  he  has  suppressed  scores  of  texts,  without  "  affect- 
ing the  argument"  in  the  least,  as  he  would  have  us  believe  !  In 
pages  207  and  249,  he  has  given  us  a  Universalis"  carica+ure  of 
what  I  quoted  from  Gregory  and  Chrysostom,  leaving  out  much 
which  the  audience  cannot  help  remembering,  when,  if  God  per- 
mit, they  shall  see  it  in  my  printed  argument. 

To  correct  his  report  would  be  to  write  it  over  again  in  my  own 
Iani2;uage  and  arrangement  instead  of  his.    The  above  are  not  near 
half  of  the  errors  which  I  have  noted.   That  want  of  strength  which 
Mr.  Kneeland  has  informed  the  public  prevents  me  from  writing, 
hinders  me  from  tinishingat  present.  The  most  of  these  corrections 
are  susceptible  of  ocular  proof,  in  my  notes  which  Mr.  Kneeland 
has  so  abundantly  authenticated.     It  is  true  that  Mr.  Jennings 
has  adduced  living  witnesses  against  me.     He  has  obtained  and 
published  in  yesterday's  Gazette,  the  certificates  of  Drs.  Ely  and 
Wylie.in  company  with  those  of  Messrs.  Hogan,  Morse,  Knee- 
land, Condie  and  Jennings!  I  confess  I  do  not  envy  Dr.  Wylie 
and  Dr.  Ely  the  company  in  which  they  are  found,  nor  the  busi- 
ness in   which  they  are  engaged.    Tiiey  have  permitted  them- 
selves to  be  enlisted  in  the  army  of  God's  enemies,  in  an  assault 
upon  the  truth  and  integrity  of  a  man  whose  honesty  and  veraci- 
ty they  both  believe  to  be  unimpeachable,  and  whose  reputation 
in  these  respects,  Dr.  Ely  vindicated  in  the  paper,  after  he  knew 
my  opinion  and  declarations  concerning  Mr,  Jennings's  report. 
As  I  never  asked  of  these  truly  eminent  and  highly  esteemed 
brethren,  any  other  assistance  than  that  of  their  prayers,  their 
countenance  and  their  books,  the  least  that  could  be  expected  of 
them  was,  that  if  they  would  not  throw  their  weight  into  the  right 
scale,  they  would  reinain  neutral.     If  the  winning  character  of 
disinterested  and  candid  witnesses  has  ensnared  them,  I  would 
beg  them  to  consider  the  court  and  the  catise  in  which  they  have 
testified.     God  says,   "  be  not  a  witness  against  thy  neighbour 
without   cause."    Upon  this  infallible  authority,   the  Scottish 
fathers  of  these  gentlemen  bottomed  their  testimony  against  the 
"  Doeg-like  sin"  of  being  «'  either  witnesses  or  members  of  in- 
quest upon  irrelevant  libels. "     If,  however,  they  had  simply  act- 
ed the  part  of  witnesses,  and  testified  what  they  could  recollect, 
instead  of  adopting  as  their  ow  n,  the  manufactured  testimony  of 
one  party,  b«fore  hearing  the  other,  who  was  sueing  for  a  hearing, 
their  conduct  would  have  been  unexceptionable.     But  they  have 
now  acted  rather  as  judges  than  as  witnesses.     They  knew  that 
Mr.  Jennings  and  myself  were  directly  at  issue  on  the  purity  of 
his  report.     He  had  been  fully  heard,  and  I  had  repeatedly,  in 


Ixxii 

public  and  in  private,  promised  a  replj  with  all  possible  expedi- 
tion. Mr.  Kneeland  had  revised  and  authenticated  the  report 
Avhich  was  published.  It  was  desirable  that  the  other  party 
sho.ild  have  an  opportunity  of  aiding  the  memories  of  these  gen- 
tlemen as  well  as  his  oppcment.  They  have  already  given  their  de- 
cision!  and  they  know  the  consequence.  Yetifthesonof  Alcnomac 
would  not  complain,  why  should  the  child  of  a  King  whom  Alc- 
nomac never  knew.?  I  am  not  sorry  that  in  much  sickness  and 
weakness,  God  enabled  me  to  defend  his  precious  truth,  even  if 
these  brethren,  after  compelling  me  to  self-defence,  should 
make  this  aground  of  an  exterminating  war.  I  know  by  sweet 
experience  in  whom  I  have  trusted:  "  And  when  my  father  and 
my  mother  forsake  me,  then  the  Lord  will  take  me  up." 

W.  L.  M'CALLA. 
Philadelphia,  October  22,  1 824. 


No-  27. 

In  consequence  of  Dr.  Ely's  speech  when  taking  the  Mo- 
derator's chair,  and  his  afterward  certifying-  for  Mr,  Jen- 
nings, the  Uuiversalists  are  said  to  have  i  reatly  extolled  his 
liberality,  and  to  have  boldly  claimed  him  as  one  of  their 
own  honorable  fraternity .  This  probably  arose  in  part,  from 
Mr  Jennings's  having  circulated  among  them  a  grossly  gar- 
bled copy  of  his  certificate,  which  may  be  seen  below  in 
No.  29.  But  as  the  true  copy,  given  above  in  No.  25,  shows 
the  Dr.  in  his  real  character,  as  a  willing  witness  for  ortho- 
doxy, and  a  decided  enemy  to  hypocrisy  and  heresy,  Mr. 
Kneeland  could  not  remain  quiet  under  that  weight  of  con- 
demnation which  the  certificate  left  on  him.  He  therefore 
unburthened  himself  in  the  following  effusion:  viz, 
"  DR.  EZRA  STILES  ELY. 

We  thank  this  Rev.  Doctor  that  he  has  been  willing  to  let 
the  world  know  his  feelings  towards  "  Mr.  Kneeland" — that  he 
"will  show  him  any  kindness  in  his  power,  AS  A  man. — 
Wonderful  Doctor  \  Now  if  God  is  only  as  good  as  Dr.  Ely, 
Mr.  Kneeland  is  perfectly  safe ;  and  the  Doctor's  squeamish' 
ness,  in  conceiving  himself  "  positively  forbidden  to  counte- 
nance him,  in  any  manner,  as  a  minister  of  the  gospel"  is  a 
matter  of  no  concern,  neither  does  it  give  Mr.  K.  the  least  un- 
easiness whatever.  But  would  it  not  h^ive  been  more  becoming 
in  this  sapient  "  D.  I>."  in  speaking  of  JVIr.  K.  '*  afier  knowing 
his  sentiments,"  to  have  pointed  out  wherein  they  are  erroneous, 
than  to  have  insinuated,  (as  he  has  done  without  proof,)  that  he 
preaches  an  essentially  different  gospel  from  that  contained  in 
the  bible?  Of  such  men  it  may  be  truly  said,  "  Ye  know  not, 
what  manner  of  spirit  ye  are  of." 


Ixxiii 

In  this  Mr.  Kneeland  seems  to  think  that  if  God  is  as 
good  as  Dr.  Elj,  he  is  perlectly  sate.  Dr.  Ely  had  said  thai 
he  conceived  himself  positively  forbidden  to  countenance  Mr. 
Kneeland  as  a  minister  of  the  gospel;  that  he  would  not 
receive  him  into  his  house  in  the  character  of  a  servant  of 
Christ.  Now  if  God  refuse,  like  Dr.  Ely,  to  countenance 
Mr.  Kneeland,  does  he  think  that  the  countenance  ot  Mr. 
Morse  and  Mr.  Jennings  will  secure  his  safety  ?  If  God, 
like  Dr.  Ely,  should  refuse  to  receive  this  heretic,  "in  the 
character  of  a  servant  of  Christ,"  does  he  think  himself  per- 
fectly safe  in  the  character  of  an.enemy  of  Christ,  or  a  ser- 
vant of  the  devil  ?  But  Dr.  Ely  has  refused  to  receive  him 
into  his  earthly  house,  in  his  present  guise.  If  God,  like 
him,  should  exclude  Mr.  Kneeland  from  his  house  in  heaven, 
does  he  think  himself  perfectly  safe  in  the  Lombard-street 
Church,  the  floors  of  which  gave  way  during  our  debate? 

No.   28. 

FROM  THE  FRANKLIN  GAZETTE. 

Apology  to  Dr.    Wylie. 
DEBATE  ON  UMVERSALISM. 

Mr.  NoRVELL — As  you  have  deelin  d  publishing  for  me  for 
the  future,  accept  ray  sincere  thanks  tor  past  favors,  and  per- 
mit me  to  inform  the  public  through  your  paper  once  more, 
that  my  argument  on  Universalisra  shall  appear  as  soon  as  pos- 
sible. Also  permit  me  to  make  a  public  apology  to  Di.  Wylie 
for  the  strictures  which  lately  appeared  in  your  paper  on  his 
conduct.  These  were  bottomed  upon  a  mistaken  supposition 
that  although  Mr.  Jennings  had  reported  my  speeches  falsely, 
he  had  reported  his  conversation  fairly.  This  was  not  the  fact, 
as  the  public  shall  see  at  a  convenient  time. 

Yours,  respectfully,  VVM.  L.  M'CALLA, 

Philadelphia,  October  30,  1824. 

Note. — We  have  offered  to  continue  to  publish  for  all  the 
parties  engaged  in  the  abovementioned  controversy  on  the  con- 
dition of  paying  for  the  insertion  of  their  communications;  a 
condition  both  reasonable  and  jnst.^^Franklin  Gazette. 

No.  29. 
Not  satisfied  with  misrepresenting  Dr.  Wylie's  testimony, 
Mr.  Jennings  lays  violent  hands  upon  Dr.  Ely's  certificate, 
^s  given  in  No.  25,  and  after  cutting  out  passages  which  arc, 

K 


Ixxiv 

in  No.  30,  tjuoted  against  hira,  publisher  it,  as  thus  altered, 
for  Dr.  Ely's  certilit  ate,  without  giving-  any  notice  of"  the 
suppressions  which  he  had  made!  The  following-  is  a  copy 
as  published  iH  p.  334  of  his  work,  in  a  supplementary  num- 
ber. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Ely,  of  the  Sd  Presbyterian  Church,  Fine-street^ 
has  certified  as  follows : 

At  the  request  of  Mr.  Jennings,  I  would  state,  that  I  have  not 
been  able,  since  the  publication  of  his  "  Minutes  of  a  Discus- 
sion," &c.  to  read  more  than  ffty  pa^es  of  the  work,  which  is 
less  than  one  sixtli  part  of  the  whole.  Ho  soon  as  I  can  find  time 
to  read  the  whole,  I  shall  freely  communicate,  at  his  request, 
my  opinion  of  the  same.— During  the  debate  of  Tuesday  after- 
noon, July  13th,  1  was  absent,  so  that  I  can  only  express  aa 
opinion  on  the  first  forty  pages,  and  the  short  speech  attributed 
to  myself,  on  pages  234  and  235,  concerning  which  I  am  free  to 
declare,  that  I  discover  in  these  forfy-tivo  pages,  so  far  as  my 
memory  serves  me,  no  important  error  or  omission.  I  think  the 
forty -two  pages,  of  which  1  now  give  mv  opinion,  as  just  a  state- 
ment of  what  was  uttered  in  my  hearing,  as  could  be  expected 
of  any  stenographer,  who  should  attempt  to  follow  men  of  readj 
utterance,  in  a  debate  of  twenty  hours. 

Philadelphia,  Oct    h2,  1824.  EZRA  STILES  ELY. 


No.   30. 

BBOM    THE    AiMERICAN    SENTINEL. 

DEBATE  ON  UNIVERSALISM. 

Mr.  Jennings,  in  the  Franklin  Gazette  of  the  2tst  ult.  think- 
ing it  of  no  avail  to  uige  any  longer  the  old  refuted  fables  invent- 
ed by  envy  and  disappointed  ambition,  seeks  to  rest  the  whole 
cause  upon  two  points  ;  my  calling  him  an  employed  stenogra- 
pher, and  my  calling  his  Minutes  a  corrupt  report  :  "  presum- 
ing,'' says  he,  "  that  if  1  can  show  that  the  most  prominent  of  his 
assertions  are  not  founded  on  fact,  it  would  only  be  intrusion  to 
attempt  to  prove  that  the  remainder  arc  ecpially  unfounded  and 
unjust."  Onthelirst  point  he  tells  us  that  if  Mr.  M'Calla  had 
"  taken  the  pains  to  have  enquired,  he  would  have  found  that  it 
was  a  Mr.  Stetson  who  was  engaged  by  the  church,  which  en- 
gagement Mr,  Stetson  could  not  fulfil  in  consequence  of  the  dis- 
cussion being  protracted  longer  than  he  could  reniamin  the  city  ; 
or  for  some  other  cause  to  me  unknown."  Let  it  be  observed 
here,  that  Mr.  Stetson  was  employed  by  the  church,  and  not  by 
Mr.  Kneeland,  and  he  declined  the  engagement  and  left  the  city 
before  the  debate  was  closed.  This  then  was  the  time  for  Mr. 
Jennings  to  come  forward  with  his  proposals.     In  his  next  words 


Ix.w 

%e  plainly  intimates  that  he  had  done  so,  and  that  my  opposition 
•otmjieiiced  iiniuediateiy  aiter  he  aaci  iioi  Air.  Kneciauti  had  of- 
fered the  work  t*  tlie  pu'uiic.      iii»  vvoitisaie,  '•'  luuuediateiy  af- 
ter J  had  made  known  inj  intmiion  Mr.   iVl'Caila  appeared  in 
your   Gazette    aud    Mutod  that  tlie  work   was    uuautiiyri^ed." 
Where  was  it  tliat  Mi.  Jenmu^j^s  had  maae  known  hia  imtaAon, 
before  i  made  this  siateiuent  i     iNo  where  that  i  have  seen.   Mr. 
Kueeiand  had  made  known  his  intention  ofiea  enough,     lie  had 
told  us,  July  ^Ist,  several  Uajs*  afier  ihe  deoate,  and  of  course 
alter  Mr.  Stetson  nad  lelc  the  city,  that  "  the  whole  discussun 
has  been  taken  down  in  short  hand  by  a  stenograpiier  employed 
for  the  purpose."     Mr.  Jennings  ni  his  last  puolication  telis  us 
tliat  Mr.  Stetson  did  not  take  notes  of  the  whole  but  only  a  part 
of  the  discussion,  and  that  Mr.  Jennings  was  "the  only  person 
■^vho  had  rutesol  the  <('/*o/e  of  the  deoate."     Also  on  the  cover 
ot   his  sixth  number  he  sujs  "■  no  person  took  notes  during  tne 
tchoie  of  the  deoate  except  mynei/.^'      Woo   but  Mr.  Jeiinings 
then,    can  be  xMr.  kneeiand's  employed  atenographer  who  took 
down  the  whole  diacua-iion,  since  he  from  his  own  sliewing,  was 
the  oidy  peraon  who  iiad  notes  oithe  wliole  debate  i^     iiut  we  are 
not  here  Uft  to  mere  inference.      That  same  Mr.  Kneeland  who 
had  told  us  aDove  that  tiie  whole  discussion  was  recorded  by  a 
stenographer  employed  for  the  purpose,  teiis  us  in  his   notice  of 
August  oth,  that  the  i\i mutes  were  "  taken  in  short  hand  by  R. 
L.  Jennings."     He  does  not  teii  us  that  the  church  had  employ^ 
ed  him,   but  he  acts  in  every  siage  of  the  business   thus  far,  as 
if  he  himseil  han  tiie  sole  coiuroi  and  the  undivided  responsioi- 
litv  of  the  undertaking.     Ht  does  not  tell  us,  as  Mr.  Jennings 
now  does,  that  Mr.  Stetson  was  tiie  employed  stenographer  j  ior 
tins  would  be  impossible,  because  this  employed  stenographer 
had  taken  down  the  ?/'/io/e  discussion,  whereas  vir.  .Stetson  re- 
corded only  a  part.     He  noes  not  tell  us  of  any  derangement  of 
plan  on  account  of  Mr.  ^tetson's  departure  from  the  city,  for  it 
was  after  this  departure  that  the  whole  discussion  by  this  em- 
ployed stenographer  was  first  promised  :  but  he  announces  the 
■work  once  and  again  with<mt  any  change  of  plan  or  workman, 
and  in  such  a  way,  in  one  case,  as  to  make  the  reader  beiievc 
that  it  is  published  not  by  Mr.  Jennings,  but  the  parties.     At 
last,  when  he  tells  us  that  the  first  number  is  m  the  press  and 
proposes  his  terms  of  sale,  1  informed   the  public,  to  prevent  a 
gross  imposition,  that  the  work  was  published  by  one  party  ex- 
clusively, and  not  authorized  by  me.     In  order  to  give  an  air  of 
impartiality  to  the  work,  Mr.  Kneeland  then  persuades  the  com 
munity  thatAe  had  not  authorized  the  work ;  but  that  without  his 
having  any  thing  to  do  with  it,  it  was  as  faithful  a  report  as  ever 
was  made.     Then  also  for  the  first  time,  Mr.  Jennings  seems  to 
emerge  from  his  subordinate  condition;  and  publicly  to  declare 


Ixxti 

himself  "the  sole  publisher  of  the  said  debate,  and  as  publiclj 
disown  being  engaged  with  either  of  the  parties  directly  or  indi- 
rectly.'^ For  believing  Mr.  Kneeland's  assertion  to  the  contrary, 
he  accuses  me  of  a  high  offence,  and  is  willing  that  all  our  lesser 
matters  of  dispute  should  follow  the  fate  of  these  two  questions, 
is  lie  an  employed  stenographer  ?  is  his  report  corrupt  ?  My 
proof  of  the  jformer  is  very  simple,  and  although  it  rests  upon  the 
testimony  of  Messrs.  Kneeland  and  Jennings,  bad  witnesses  I 
confess,  since  they  contradict  themselves  and  one  another,  yet 
they  ought  to  be  good  in  a  Universalist  court,  although  disquali- 
fied by  the  constitution  of  Pennsylvania.  Mr.  Kneeland  says 
that  the  whole  discussion  was  recorded  by  an  employed  steno- 
grapher:—Mr.  Jennings  says  that  he  was  the  only  one  who  re- 
corded the  whole  discussion: — Therefore  he  is  the  employed 
person.  Accordingly  his  Master  at  last  formally  announces  his 
name. 

There  is  a  way  of  corrupting  a  work  of  this  kind  without  any 
of  those  grievous  interpolations  and  suppressions  which  were  ex- 
posed in  the  Franklin  Ga/.ette  of  the  23d  ult.  The  strength  of 
each  part  depends  on  its  connexion,  and  every  fact  and  argument 
will  become  nugatory,  every  anecdote  and  retort  will  become 
insipid.  There  is  no  difference  between  the  best  and  the  worst 
composition,  w^hen  they  are  read  across  the  columns  of  a  news- 
paper. Not  satisfied  with  transposing  my  remarks  on  the  dis- 
orderly conduct  of  the  Universalists,  and  thus  introducing  them 
where  there  is  no  call  for  them,  he  actually  transposes  his  notice 
of  the  clapping  and  hissing  of  the  audience  which  occasioned  the 
animadversions  of  the  parties.  Near  the  middle  of  page  47,  he 
tells  us  that  there  was  "  loud  clapping,  then  hissing."  Now  it 
is  a  fact,  which  the  audience  will  doubtless  recollect,  that  this  loud 
clapping  took  place  just  before  "Mr.  Morse  sat  down,'' and  of 
course  belongs  to  the  middle  of  page  48.  During  the  debate  I 
observed  that  m}^  opponent  sometimes  cpmplained  of  my  doing 
nothing  but  reading  my  little  book,  and  at  other  times,  that  I  did 
nothing  but  exercise  my  wit  upon  his  speeches.  This  contradic- 
tion, I  observed,  reminded  me  of  the  table  of  the  traveller  and 
the  Satyr,  the  latter  of  whom  drove  the  former  from  his  cave  (not 
hut,  as  Mr.  Jennings  has  it,)  for  blowing  hot  and  cold  with  the  same 
breath.  Mr.  Jennings  thinking  that  this  was  applicable  in  page 
80,  tells  it  there  for  me  better  probably  than  I  told  it  myself^  but 
in  page  87  to  which  it  really  belongs,  he  merely  refers  to  it,  after 
making  a  confused  and  incorrect  statement  of  the  facts  which 
occasioned  me  to  relate  it.  A  disputant  who  should  speak  as  he 
has  made  me  do  in  page  112,  about  the  lion  and  the  eagle  might 
be  suspected  of  an  addled  brain.  This  unsavoury  omelet  which 
he  has  mixed  for  me,  is  about  equal  to  the  barbecue  with  which 
he  favoured  us  from  Sterne's  Sentimental  Journey.  In  this 
place  he  does  not  give  my  authority,  certain  Scottish  Reviewers 


Ixxvii 

to  whom  I  expressly  referred  for  my  real  remarks,  but  he  refers 
to  them  in  page  86  where  I  said  nothing  about  them. 

In  quoting  a  certain  passage  of  Scripture  I  observed  that  it  re- 
lated to  the  end  of  the  world.  Mr.  Kneeland  immediately  set  to 
work  to  prove  that  this  expression,  the  end  of  the  world,  did  not 
mean  what  we  usually  understand  by  it.  As  these  words  were  not 
in  the  text  but  only  in  my  comment,  I  thought  that  Mr.  Kneeland's 
criticism  resembled  one  of  Thomas  Paine's  which  I  had  read 
more  than  a  dozen  years  ago,  on  Job  37,  18.  Without  consult- 
ino-  the  sacred  text  where  he  would  have  found  that  the  word 
there  used  meant  a  molten  metallic  maan,  Mr.  Paine  exercised 
his  ingenuity  upon  our  translation,  inolten  looking-glass;  to  prove 
that  the  book  of  Job  was  written  since  the  manufacture  of  glass 
was  discovered.  The  only  time  that  I  used  this  illustration  was 
in  connection  with  an  argument  which  Mr.  Jennings  professes  to 
give  in  page  97,  where  the  illustration  is  not  found,  but  only  an 
indefinite  reference  to  it  as  having  been  given  before.  Turn- 
ing back,  we  find  it  transposed  to  page  86,  and  attached  to  a 
foolish  observation  carved  out  of  something  that  I  said,  but  to 
which  it  is  no  illustration  at  all.  He  probably  observed  also  that 
my  reference  to  the  metallic  mirrors  of  the  ancients  was  clumsy 
and  obscure.  For  the  sake  of  perspicuity,  he  makes  me  say  that 
"the  original  does  not  signify  glass,  but  something  as  transpa- 
rent as  glass!"  Transparent  metallic  mirrors  1  He  might  as 
well  have  made  me  talk  of  transparent  millstones. 

Mr.  E.  of  Maysville,  Ky.  once  lent  me  a  little  work  on  Uni- 
versalism  which  supposes  the  case  of  a  poor  afflicted  widow 
reading  Scarlett's  translation  of  2  Cor.  4-17,  and  enquiring  of 
him  what  he  meant  by  aeonian  in  that  text.  On  Thursday  af- 
ternoon of  thi'  debate,  I  recounted  this  case  as  one  which  I 
had  read.  Mr.  Kneeland  insinuated  that  the  case  was  manu- 
factured for  the  occasion;  and  asked  why  1  did  not  use  the 
name  of  Kneeland  at  once,  as  that  was  what  1  meant.  The 
next  morning  I  commented  upon  2  Cor.  5  1,  and  supposed  the 
case  of  a  sinful  and  miserable  man  like  myself  instead  of  the 
widow,  going  to  Mr.  Scarlett;  or,  as  my  opponent  seemed  to 
prefer  it,  suppose  that  1  should  go  to  Mr.  Crimson,  to  enquire 
the  meaning  of  this  celebrated  word  aionian.  This  was  un- 
doubtedly the  first  instance,  and,  unless  1  am  egregiously  mis- 
taken, it  was  the  only  instance  in  which  the  word  crimson  was 
thus  used.  Yet  in  page  250  where  this  case  is  reported,  this 
word  is  not  found.  Turning  back  to  pages  224,  247,  we  find  it 
tranposed  to  the  case  of  the  widow,  and  twice  used  in  that  con- 
nexion where  it  was  never  mentioned. 

Besides  all  the  errors  which  have  been  already  exposed, 
notes  are  now  before  me  of  more  than  four  score  instances  of 
palpable  alterations,  some  of  them  affecting  the  argument,  and 


Xxvtti 

all  afff  ctinff  the  cTiaracter  of  the  speaker  for  HnHerstand5n?  or 
probity.  This  leniark  is  not  inten  led  as  an  ackno  *  h  liiifiiipnt 
of  the  purity  of  the  report  in  other  places,  where  Ins  alterations 
are  less  observable,  nor  is  it  intended  as  an  intimation  that  the 
public  indulgence  shall  be  taxed  by  a  multiplicity  ot  specifica- 
tions. It  shall  be  taken  tor  granted,  that  it  a  suitable  propor- 
tion of  these  spurious  speeches  can  be  invalidated,  this  w  ill  suf- 
ficiently prove,  according  to  Mr.  Jennings'  rule,  "that  the  re- 
mainder are  equally  unfounded  and  unjust."  But  this  Aill  ap- 
pear much  raore  plainly  when  those  whn  heard  the  debate  shall 
compate  Mr.  Jennings'  report  with  my  argurr<ent  For  this 
■work  we  shall  wait,  to  .shew  my  real  division  which  he  has  so 
transformed  in  page  22;  and  my  real  criticism  which  he  has 
pretended  to  copy  in  pages  284  and  324,  and  other  places.  In 
page  220,  he  appears  disposed  to  make  a  solemn  subject  ludi- 
crous, at  my  expense,  and  at  the  expense  of  truth.  In  illustra- 
ing  Paul's  ex])ression,  before  the  everlasting  times,  by  an  ex- 
pression ot  the  same  writer,  far  above  all  heavens,  I  had  occa- 
sion to  tell  the  audience  oi'  the  aerial  and  ethtrial  heavens,  and 
the  heavens  of  heavens.  My  first  heavens,  the  atmosphere  of 
our  earth,  in  which  birds  fly,  Mr.  Jennings  makes  the  residence 
of  God  and  sometimes  God  himself.  My  second  heavens,  in 
■which  the  sun,  moon  and  stars  are  fixed,  he  makes  the  resi- 
dence of  the  Son  of  God,  or  the  Divine  8on  himself  ls\j 
third  heavens  the  abode  of  God  and  saints  and  angels,  he  makes 
the  residence  of  angels  only.  His  making  me  refuse  to  pray 
for  Universalists,  under  pretence  that  they  had  committed  the 
unpardonable  sin  is  not  the  only  error  that  can  be  plainly 
proved  in  page  81.  Moris  his  manner  of  introducing  Epicurus 
who  died  for  fear  of  poverty,  when  he  was  worth  70,(>00  ses- 
terces, a  solitary  error  in  page   183. 

Mr.  Jennings  thinks  himself  a  witness  between  the  parties  in 
some  matters  of  fact,  and  therefore  has  a  special  eye  on  these 
in  his  report.  As  Mr.  Kneeland  continued  to  the  last  day,  to 
inform  the  audience  of  his  want  of  matter  to  fill  up  his  time,  I 
informed  them  on  that  daj,  after  one  of  these  complaints,  that 
as  I  had  much  more  to  say  than  the  time  allotted  would  allow, 
I  should  be  much  obliged  to  my  opponent  for  such  crumbs  of 
bis  half-hours  as  he  could  spare.  This  had  a  bearing  upon  the 
question  whether  I  was  allowed  time  to  finish  my  argument  or 
not.  Mr.  Jennings  therefore  in  page  259,  converts  it  into  a  com- 
pliment to  Mr.  Kneeland 's  superior  learning,  without  the  least 
reference  to  my  want  of  time.  His  words  are  the  following, 
viz;  "And  although  I  may  not  have  the  learning  of  my  oppo- 
nent to  make  converts  of  vou  all,  yet  I  hope  he  will  give  me 
the  crumbs  which  fail  from  his  table.''    It  is  evident  that  he 


noted  the  word  crumbs,  with  his  boasted  "powers  of  the  steno- 
grapiiic  art,"  and  then  made  the  rest  as  lie  pleased. 

It  will  be  recollected  that  after  my  remarks  about  Mr.  Knee- 
land's  Greek  Grammar  of  which  I  ^poke  from  inibrmation  ob- 
tained in  the  house  during  the  debate,  1  was  immediately  cor- 
rected as  to  tbe  matter  ot  fact.  It  was  said  that  he  had  not 
ivntten  it.  My  reply  was,  "Perhaps,  then  he  published  it 
without  writing  it,  as  I  have  indirect  e\iden(e  that  he  did  with 
his  Lectures  and  Translation."  In  page  2o-2,  wh)ch  is  fidl  of 
errois,  Mr.  Jennings  makes  me  say  ''Peihaps  he  meant  it  was 
published  without  having  been  written  at  all!"  In  Mr.  Knee- 
land's  letter  of  the  I8ih  ult.  to  Dr.  Kly,  he  sa\s,  concerning 
me,  "he  stated  during  the  discussion  that  1  had  written  and 
published  SL  Greek  Grammar,  which  is  totally  incorrect."  To- 
tally incorrect!!  That  is  he  neither  wrote  a  Greek  Gram- 
mar, nor  published  a  Gjeek  grammar;  tor  if  he  did  eitb(  r  the 
one  or  the  other,  the  remark  attributed  to  me  is  not  totally  in- 
correct, but  half  of  il  is  true.  Which  then  is  the  greatest 
crime,  for  me  to  say,  through  mere  mistake,  that  my  opponent 
wroie  a  book  which  he  had  reall)  published,  or  for  hin>  know- 
ingly to  deny  the  fact  of  publishing?  But  it  will  be  recollected 
by  the  audience  that  I  frequently  requested  to  be  corrected 
where  mistaken  in  stating  ti  e  words,  sentiments,  or  acts  of  my 
opponent.  Of  these  requests  it  is  not  observed  that  the  impar- 
tial Mr.  Jennings  has  taken  any  notice. 

After  Mr.  Kneeland  had  tried  a  variety  of  arts,  with  but  lit- 
tle success,  to  divert  me  from  an  argument  which  he  could  not 
withstand,  he  introduced  a  certificate  of  Harry  Starr,  a  promis- 
ing young  satellite  of  our  Universalist  luminary,  to  prove  that  I 
had  announced  to  a  brother  clergyman  a  determination  "  to 
plague  him  by  playing  off,"  and  that  1  "  would  not  come  to  the 
point."  Without  recording  all  the  features  of  dissimulation  ex- 
hibited in  this  transaction,  it  may  be  observed  that  my  opponent 
manifested  a  determination  to  make  me  spend  my  precious  time 
in  combatting  this  slander,  or  submit  to  its  stain.  For  this  pur- 
pose he  says,  in  page  216,  "I  hope  therefore,  my  opponent  will 
not  fail  to  prove  the  contents  of  the  note  which  I  have  read  not 
to  be  true.  If  he  fail  to  do  this,  what  will  be  your  decision.^" 
As  this  was  a  mere  scheme  to  enable  Mr.  Kneeland  to  play  off 
from  the  point,  and  to  plague  his  antagonist,  f  determined  to 
stick  to  the  argument  and  pay  but  little  attention  to  Harry,  al- 
though I  had  a  certificate  of  the  clergyman  in  question  to  prove 
an  alibi^  and  the  testimony  of  four  persons  present  when  Starr  re- 
ceived his  infjrmation,  to  show  that  the  light  that  was  in  him  was 
darkness.  I  therefore  contented  myself  with  telling  the  audi- 
ence on  the  last  day  emphatically,  that  this  was  a  fabrication, 
got  up  for  ,•.  particular  purpose.  In  Mr.  Jennings's  report  of 
this  concise  nutice  in  page  244,  he  has  omitted  this  emphatical 


Ixxx 

expression.  Just  before  my  opponent  read  his  formidable  com- 
munication, three  anonymous  letters  were  put  into  my  hands. 
Although  1  took  no  written  minute,  memorandum  or  note  of  them 
nor  ever  said  that  I  had,  Mr.  Jennings  says  for  me  in  page  217, 
"  I  have  on  my  Minutes  a  memorandum  of  some  notes  which  I 
also  have  received." 

As  my  opponent  occupied  much  of  his  time  in  complaining  of 
my  little  book,  I  showed  it  to  the  audience,  observing  that  it 
contained  three  sheets  of  letter  paper  folded  into  96  pages,  five 
of  which  were  blank,  and  so  many  others  unused,  that  all  my 
notes  in  the  debate  did  not  probably  occupy  more  than  two 
sheets  and  a  half.  The  report  makes  this  the  size  of  the  whole 
volume,  and  the  pages  to  amount  to  thirty.  This  is  about  as 
true,  however,  as  the  profanity  which  he  has  attributed  to  me 
shortly  after  in  page  87. 

If  Mr.  Kneeland  did  not  succeed  in  exposing  my  pronuncia- 
tion, his  employed  stenographer  has  effectually  done  it.  In  page 
1 68  he  has  given  me  a  z.  for  my  sibilant  s.  and  an  a-w  for  my  Ger- 
man aspirate.  In  the  next  page  he  attributes  to  me  a  guttural 
instead  of  a  nasal  sound.  In  the  foregoing  page  he  makes  me 
say  that  in  the  pronunciation  of  Hebrew  I  agreed  with  Dr.  Wil- 
son, whereas  I  said  that  Parkhurst  was  my  guide,  from  whom 
Dr.  Wilson  differed.  In  page  185,  he  makes  me  name  Dr.  Wil- 
son, as  a  more  learned  man  than  Dr.  Campbell  of  Scotland, 
whereas  I  only  referred  to  him  as  a  gentleman  of  this  city,  who 
had  been  mentioned  by  my  opponent  with  Dr.  Campbell,  and  of 
•whom  I  had  that  opinion  ;  but  did  not  give  his  name. 

In  a  certain  case  1  had  to  remind  my  opponent  that  the  Mo- 
derators were  only  to  decide  on  matters  of  order.  In  page  171, 
he  makes  me  say  that  the  Moderator  "  sits  here  as  a  judge  of 
plain  matter  oi  fact  and  nothing  else  !"  To  give  a  detailed  ac- 
count of  all  such  alterations  as  these  would  be  more  than  the 
public  would  bear,  and  certainly  more  than  is  necessary  for 
their  satisfaction  as  to  the  real  character  of  the  report.  In  page 
173,  he  gives  me  Dr.  James,  a  President  of  a  college  in  Scot- 
land, instead  of  Dr.  Jamieson,  who  was  no  President.  In  186, 
he  changes  Dr.  Miller  into  Professor  Stuart.  In  the  same  page 
he  makes  me  speak  of  David's  writings  instead  of  his  dead  body. 
In  the  next  page  he  changes  an  escape  into  a  surrender  and  al- 
ways into  very  seldom.  In  page  173,  he  omits  a  modern  Dr. 
]V).  whom  I  expressly  mentioned,  and  gives  me  Priestley^s  Cor- 
ruptions inste-dd  of  Miller's  Letters  to  Baltimore.  In  page  282, 
he  makes  me  compliment  the  candour  ot  Kneeland  instead  of 
M'Knight;  and  in  223,  makes  me  say  that  I,  instead  of  my  op- 
ponent, had  quoted  Parkhurst.  In  page  279,  he  makes  me  say 
that  in  the  refutation  of  L  niversalist  writers,  1  would  use  their 
arrangement  instead  of  my  own.     In  page  80,  he  has,  besides 


Ixxxi 

many  other  capricious  turns,  changed  backs  into  bosoms,  axidrnv 
hearers  into  his  Indians.  In  page  203,  he  has  chano-ed  Old 
England  to  NewEnghmd,  and  in  the  bottom  of  298,  has  substi- 
tuted the  Scriptures  for  my  little  book.  For  a  Hebrew  transla- 
tion of  the  New  Testament  which  I  had  just  borrowed,  he  has 
in  paj:;e  218,  substituted  a  Greek  Testament,  and  has,  of  course, 
changed  my  Shcol,  intended  to  counteract  an  assertion  of  my 
opponent,  for  Hades  which  has  no  application.  This,  however 
did  not  aj/ict  the  argument  more  than  clianging  Hebrew  into 
Greek  and  Greek  into  Hebrew,  both  of  which  he  has  done  in 
page  153.  As  Mr.  Kneeland  declared  sin  to  be  a  mere  nega- 
tion, I  observed  that  to  condemn  or  punish  it,  would  be  like 
condemning  a  vacuum  or  punishing  a  man  for  an  empty  stomach. 
Without  affecting  the  argument,  as  Mr.  Jennings  supposes,  he 
has  made  me  say,  that  "  It  would  be  like  attempting  to  clear  a 
vacuum,  or  like  administering  an  emetic  to  clear  an  empty  stom- 
ach !"  As  the  Report  in  general  has  much  the  eftect  of  the 
antimonial  preparation,  more  than  half  the  glaring  alterations 
which  have  been  noted  must  be  dispensed  with.  To  sa\  e  time 
in  this  disgusting  occupation,  my  i-eferences  to  most  of  the  cases 
have  been  very  short  and  therefore  obscure.  This  arises  from 
his  having  not  only  altered  the  particulars  referred  to,  but  al- 
most every  thing  connected  with  them.  Unless  therefore,  the 
whole  passage  is  restored  to  its  original  purity,  the  rest.)ration  of 
the  word  to  which  I  refer,  would  appear  as  unaccountable  a>  to 
see  Saul  among  the  prophets,  or  a  Presbyterian  minister  of  the 
highest  standing  associated  with  a  herd  of  Universalist  wit- 
nesses. 

I  have  neither  time  nor  disposition  to  enumerate  the  many  de- 
viations from  truth  which  have  been  proved  against  Mr.  Itlor'se  in 
the  public  prints.  I  would  only  suggest  to  his  biographer,  that 
he  can  borrow  from  Smollet  a  very  suitable  title  for  his  memoirs. 
Let  them  be  called  "  The  Adventures  of  an  Atom."  Mr. 
Kneeland,  a  party,  and  Mr.  Jennings,  his  employed  stenogra- 
pher, are  well  known.  Mr.  Condie  is  one  of  tiiose  whjf  in 
great  wi-ath  and  disappointment,  called  me  a  liar  at  the  close 
©f  the  debate.  As  this  indecent  conduct  was  occasioned  by  the 
triumph  of  truth,  I  was  more  amused  at  the  livid  hue  with  which 
rage  had  adorned  his  countenance,  than  1  was  hurt  at  his  words. 
His  testimony  manifests  the  same  zeal  in  the  same  cause.  With 
Mr.  Kneeland  he  is  delighted  to  make  the  Report  an  exhibi'iou 
of  my  peculiar  style  and  manner',  and  with  Dr.  Wylie's  certifi- 
cate coined  by  Mr.  Jennings,  he  even  makes  it  give  my  very 
words  and  expressions.  Although  this  is  v/hat  Mr.  Jennings  at 
first  promised,  he  has  long  given  it  up,  and  taken  refuge  under 
<he  argument  without  the  loords  Even  the  modest  Mr.  Knoe- 
Tand  says  in  his  certificate,  "  in  many  places  T  can  ]»ereeivesome 


ixxwi 

verbal  din'ercnce,"  aiul  Di.  Ely  certifies,  that  "  Mr.  Jennings 
does  not  pretend,  in  every  instance,  to  give  the  words  of  the 
speakers."  It  would  be  well  for  the  witnesses  to  agree  with  one 
another  and  not  to  give  the  reporter  more  credit  than  he  claims. 

Witli  one  breath  Mr.  Jennings  tells  us  that  he  has  "merely 
given  an  outline"  of  Dr.  Ely's  speech,  and  with  the  next,  express- 
es great  indignation  at  my  calling  his  report  of  it  "  an  invented 
address."  The  evidence  of  my  own  ears,  of  others  who  were 
present,  and  Dr.  Ely's  own  declarations,  must  form  my  apology. 
Although  I  was  myself  a  witness,  both  parties  were  heard  before 
my  opinion  was  publicly  expressed.  The  reason  which  Dr. 
Ely  gave  for  correcting  his  piece  at  all  was  the  very  same  which 
was  given  by  an  euiinent  minister  of  this  city,  mentioned  in  my 
lasi  article.  It  was  an  unwillingness  that  any  thing  injurious  to 
religion,  should  be  published  with  his  name  attached  to  it.  He 
declared  to  me  expressly,  "If  Mr.  Jennings  has  reported  you 
as  he  has  me,  you  have  good  reason  to  complain."  Long  ago 
he  gave  me  privately  the  same  opinion  of  the  first  number  which 
his  certificate  contains.  I  told  him  that  he  would  not  always  be- 
lieve so.  By  way  of  specimen  I  asked  him  what  he  thought  of 
Mr.  Jennings's  report  of  my  division  in  page  22,  compared  with 
the  report  which  I  should  then  give  him.  Mr.  Jennings  sajs, 
that  I  undertake  to  "prove  the  absolute  and  eternal  punishment 
of  the  wicked,  1st,  by  the  scriptures;  2dly,  from  the  account 
which  they  contain  of  the  attributes  of  God;  and  Sdly,  from  the 
condition  of  fallen  man."  My  report  of  the  division  was  this: 
1,  Inference;  2,  Implication;  3,  Contrast;  4,  Negation;  5,  Af- 
firmation. The  comparison  convinced  him  that  Mr.  Jennings 
was  wrong,  although  he  had  not  before  observed  it.  The  daj 
after  the  publication  of  the  certificates,  Mr.  Jennings's  rfearf  ass 
was  presented  to  Dr.  Ely  and  Uv,  Wylie  as  another  specimen, 
with  the  same  result. 

This  last  mentioned  gentleman,  like  Dr.  Ely,  told  me  long 
ago,  that  he  could  discover  no  error  in  the  report,  but  like  him 
he  could  detect  one  when  pointed  out;  and  when  he  gave  his 
opinion  to  Mr.  Jennings  he  did  not  recollect,  if  he  ever  knew, 
my  intention  of  giving  my  side  of  the  question  in  relation  to  the 
particulars  of  the  Minutes.  1  could  not  obtain  an  interview  with 
him  until  my  last  article  was  in  the  office,  and  probably  set  up, 
or  my  remarks  concerning  him  should  have  been  of  a  very  differ- 
ent character  If  he  had  really  spoken  as  Mr.  Jennings  reports, 
I  could  still  say  of  him  and  Dr.  Ely,  notwitlistanding  this  injury, 
that  they  are  "  truly  eminent  and  highly  esteemed  brethren.'* 
But  although  Dr.  VVylie  gave  this  fair  and  impartial  reporter 
liberty  to  "  make  any  proper  use  he  pleased''  of  his  real  opinion 
concerning  the  Minutes,  he  did  not  give  him  leave  artfully  to 
make  a  false  impression  concerning  the  conversation,  as  he  has 


Ixxxiii 

done  so  often  concerning  my  speeches.  In  a  letter  to  me  of  the 
25th  ult.  from  which  a  few  words  have  just  been  quoted,  the  Dr. 
says,  "  Truth  obliges  me  to  remark  that  the  various  items  of  the 
conversation  between  Mr.  Jennings  and  me  above  stated,  have 
been  rather  artfully  put  together.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection, 
the  word  *  although'  together  with  the  two  underscored  expres- 
sions, are  inferences  of  his  own.  At  all  events,  I  have  no  hesi- 
tation to  say  that  the  stateuient,  taken  tout  ensemble.,  conveys  a 
different  meaning  from  what  was  intended.  Judge  yourself, 
whether  the  premises  [the  foregoing  narrative  in  the  letter]  war- 
rant such  a  conclusion.  The  manner  in  which  these  truths  are 
stated  by  Mr.  Jennings,  seems  to  present  the  air  of  a  strong  con- 
viction of  conscientious  obligation  to  come  forwax'd  and  state  the 
/rw/A  in  evidence  against  Mr.  M'Calla,  a  man  tvhose  veracity  / 
believe  unimpeachable.  Very  contrary  to  thif  was  the  fact.' 
Here  then  is  the  amount  of  Dr.  Wylie's  testimony.  Mr.  Jen- 
nings asked  his  opinion  of  his  minutes  of  two  hours  and  an  half  of 
the  debate,  while  as  yet  the  other  party  was  not  heard.  Dr. 
Wylie  confesses  that  he  can  see  no  fault  in  it,  and  gives  him  li- 
berty to  make  any  proper  use  of  this  declaration.  This  faithful  re- 
porter then  cooks  it  into  acertficate,  in  which  he  reports  the  Dr.  as 
saying,  that"  truth  obliges  him  to  declare tha.the  cannot  discover 
the  least  difference  even  in  expression."  The  Dr.  now  speaks  for 
himself,  and  says  that  trtith  obliges  him  to  remark  that  this  preten- 
ded obligation  to  give  a  premature  testimony,  and  this  exactness 
of  the  Report  ^'•even  in  expression,''^  given  to  him  by  the  reporter, 
Are  inferences  of  his  own;  that  the  items  of  the  conversation  have 
been  rather  artfidly  put  together.,  and  that  the  statement  altogeth- 
er conveys  a  different  meaning  from  what  was  intended,  and  one 
very  contrary  to  fact.  If  all  this  is  said  by  Mr.  Jennings's  own 
witness  concerning  his  report  of  a  few  sentences,  what  are  we 
to  expect  in  a  report  of  a  twenty  hours's  debate. 

The  testimony  of  Dr.  Ely,  taken  altogether,  is  not  much  more 
favourable.  But  if  it  were,  the  Universalists  are  the  last  who 
should  claim  the  benefit  of  it,  since  they  have  in  their  spleen, 
denied  him  the  essential  qualifications  of  a  witness.  It  will  be 
recollected  that  Mr.  Kneeland,  in  his  letter  of  the  13th  of  Sep- 
tember, attributed  to  him  insinuations  which  he  said  were  "  far 
beneath  the  dignity  of  either  the  gentleman  or  the  christian." 
To  keep  from  ascribing  such  language  to  "  a  heart  desperately 
wicked,'"  he  is  forced  by  the  sweet  impulse  of  charity,  to  conclude 
that  it  does  not  proceed  "  from  a  mind  that  is  sound. "  Yet  not 
many  months  after  laying  aside  his  testimony  in  my  favour,  on 
ihe  pretended  ground  of  lunacy,  he  is  produced  against  me  with- 
out any  perceivable  change  for  the  better.  It  is  true,  I  am  wil- 
ling to  admit  him  as  a  witness^  every  one  knows  him,  as  well  as 


Ixxxiv 

Dr.  Wylie,  to  be  one  of  the  greatest  lights  ot" our  countrj;  every 
body  knows  that  Mhen  Mr.  Kneeland  accused  him  of  unsound- 
ness, and  when  Mr.  Morse  accused  Mr.  Magoffin,  and  when  Mr, 
Ballou  accused  me,  they  did  not  believe  what  they  said,  for  we 
should  all  be  very  sound,  if  we  would  go  over  to  their  side;  yet 
they  ought  to  know  that  when  they  have  committed  themselves 
by  such  gross,  guilty,  slanderous  dissimulation,  they  ought,  for 
decency's  sake,  to  preserve  a  small  degree  of  consistency,  and 
not  to  disqualify  a  witness  one  moment  and  summon  him  the 
next. 

Where  now  are  those  hundreds  of  witnesses  whose  testimony 
Mr.  Kneeland  told  us  "could  be  obtained  if  it  were  necessary, 
of  its  being  as  faithful  a  report  as  ever  was  made  .►"'  I  am  in- 
formed that  general  orders  were  given  from  the  pulpit  and  the 
press  for  their  battallious  to  muster  with  all  possible  speed.  On 
the  cover  of  the  last  number  of  the  Report,  Mr.  Jennings  "  ear- 
nestly requests  every  individual"  who  is  willing,  to  send  his  cer- 
tificate "  as  soon  as  possible  to  the  office  of  the  Saturday  Even- 
ing Post,  or  to  the  residence  of  the  publisher."  It  was  prudent 
to  name  two  places,  as  one  could  hardly  be  expected  to  contain 
the  certificates  of  so  many  hundreds.  The  roll  is  called,  and 
the  faithful  brethren,  Messrs.  Kneeland,  Jennings,  Morse,  Hogan 
and  Condie  are  found  in  their  places.  Now,  gentlemen,  are  you 
willing  to  certify  that  this  is  "  as  faithful  a  report  as  ever  was 
made?"  Is  it  as  faithful  as  some  made  by  Mr.  Stansbury,  Re- 
porter to  Congress  ?  Mr.  Morse  and  Mr.  Hogan,  speak  your 
minds,  for  you  must  understand  this  matter  well,  as  you  gaped 
and  yawned  and  looked  out  of  the  window  so  much  while  the 
Kentuckian  was  speaking.  They  testify  that  the  report  is 
"  without  any  omissions  or  additions  affecting  the  arguments  :" 
and  remember  that  this  school  does  not  consider  even  the  case  of 
Lazarus  and  the  rich  man  as  affecting  the  argument.  Well  Mr. 
Kneeland,  can  you  admit  any  flaws  ?  Be  cautious  now,  and  do 
not  expose  us.  "  In  many  places  I  can  perceive  some  verbal 
difference."  What  !  is  this  the  character  of  "as  faithful  a  re- 
port as  ever  was  made  ?"  If  T/owgo  that  far,  what  may  we  not 
expect  from  the  other  party  ?  Dr.  Condie,  you  are  ready 
ENOUGH,  it  is  true,  but  your  testimony  is  not  worth  much  fov 
that  very  reason.  In  this  sad  condition,  they  were  no  doubt 
much  refreshed  with  the  testimony  made  for  Dr.  Wylie  by  Mr. 
Jennings,  and  with  that  of  Dr.  Ely  whom  they  had  before  reject- 
ed as  unsound.  Since  its  publication,  Dr.  Ely's  opinion  has  been 
directly  opposed  by  witnesses  of  equal  respectability,  and  I  hope 
will  be  changed  by  himself  when  he  has  heard  both  sides. — The 
injury  done  to  Dr.  Wylie  by  his  reporter,  I  confess,  does  not 
give  me  great  pain,  wnce  it  proves  Mr.  Jennings  unfaithful  in  a 


little,  and  of  course  not  to  be  trusted  in  much.  It  has  also  made 
rae  better  acquainted  with  a  man  whose  forbearance,  conscien- 
tiousness, candour,  and  tenderness  of  affection  I  hope  to  imitate, 
and  whose  society  and  friendship  I  desire  to  enjoy  in  this,  wil- 
derness and  in  the  land  of  promise. 

W.  L.  M 'CALL A. 
Philadelphia,  Nov.  4,  1824, 


PART  FIRST. 

The  question  which  has  called  us  together  involves  an 
essential  doctrine  of  Christianity.  Hence  arises,  in  part, 
my  great  willingness  to  engage  in  its  discussion.  For  the 
lawfulness  of  such  an  undertaking  we  have  the  authority  of 
God's  word,  apostolical  precedent,  and  the  example  of  the 
Reformers ;  of  whom  Martin  Luther  held  a  debate  of  ten 
days  with  the  Pope's  Legate,  at  Leipsic;  and  Melancthon, 
Calvin  and  Knox  had  their  public  conferences  with  the  ec- 
clesiastics of  the  establishment  to  which  they  were  opposed. 
These  do  not  necessarily  give  scope  to  evil  passions  more 
than  written  controversy.  This  method  of  defending  the 
truth  may,  in  certain  circumstances,  be  conducted  as  de- 
cently and  as  profitably  as  the  other  plan.  Yet  if  my  con- 
duct in  the  commencement  or  prosecution  of  this  enterprise 
be  censurable,  I  wish  it  to  be  explicitly  stated  and  under- 
stood that  the  blame  is  my  own  exclusively.  As  I  am  not 
considered  responsible  to  my  brethren  in  this  particular, 
they  cannot  be  at  all  implicated  in  the  business.  My  only 
desire  is,  that  if  God  enable  me  to  speak  for  edification, 
he  alone  may  have  the  praise.  On  the  Triune  God  of  Israel 
is  my  only  dependence.  Willingly  do  I  confess  my  natural 
depravity,  and  inability  to  do  any  thing  acceptable  to  God, 
or  profitable  to  his  people,  except  by  the  grace  of  a  risen 
Saviour,  and  by  the  help  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

\mong  those  errorists  who  deny  the  eternity  of  future 
punishment,  there  are  two  general  descriptions — the  Des«- 
tructionists  who  believe  in  the  annihilation  of  the  wicked, 
and  the  Universalists  who  believe  in  their  eternal  happi- 
ness. Some  inspired  men,  as  Job  and  Jeremiah,  have,  in 
the  bitterness  of  their  souls,  lamented  over  their  own  exist- 
ence, and  appeared  to  think,  with  the  suicide,  that  annihi- 
lation was  preferable  even  to  the  sufferings  of  this  life,  and 
of  course  preferable  to  the  eternal  and  the  insupportable 
wrath  of  God,  threatened  in  his  word.  This  system  is 
equally  opposed  to  the  scriptural   account  of  degrees  in 


88 

punishment ;  >vbicli  we  are  certainly  taught  by  our  Saviom* 
in  his  sermon  on  the  mount,  where  lie  dooms  one  to  the 
judgment,  another  to  the  council,  and  a  third  to  hell  fire  ; 
the  servant  who  sinned  against  knowledge  to  the  punish- 
ment of  many  stripes,  and  iiim  who  sinned  ignorantly  to 
comparatively  few  stripes  ;  and  those  who  despise  the  gos- 
pel to  a  more  intolerable  punishment  than  that  of  Sodom 
and  Gomorrah.  Annihilation  admits  of  no  degrees,  nor 
does  it  admit  of  that  consciousness  of  existence  and  appre- 
hension of  the  existence  of  an  indignant  Creator,  which 
the  Scriptures  attribute  to  the  condemned  sinner,  wlicn  it 
is  said,  *'ye  shall  know  that  I  am  the  Lord."  "  He  siiall 
©ev^ard  him  and  he  shall  know  it."  '*  Ye  shall  know  that  I 
thei  Lord  have  poured  out  my  fury  upon  you  " 

Among  Universalists  there  is  a  great  variety.  Some 
believe  in  a  limited  punishment  in  the  future  world,  others 
confine  it  to  this  life.  In  each  of  these  sects,  there  is  a 
variety  of  sentiments  concerning  the  description  of  punish- 
ment to  be  inflicted,  some  considering  it  condign,  others 
penitentiary,  others  disciplinary.  My  opponent  passes  for 
a  Universalist  and  not  a  Destructionist.  He  professes  to 
belong  to  that  sect  which  confines  punishment  to  this  life, 
and  to  that  class  which  considers  punisliment  disciplinary, 
that  is,  intended  for  the  good  of  the  subject.  His  sentiments 
and  my  own,  may  be  seen  in  the  question  which  we  have 
adopted  for  discussion,  and  the  several  clauses  of  which, 
we  have  espoused  respectively.  "  Is  tlie  punishment  of  the 
wicked  absolutely  eternal  ?  or  is  it  only  a  temporal  punish- 
ment in  this  world  for  their  good,  and  to  be  succeeded  by 
eternal  happi)iess  after  death?'  The  affirmative  of  the  lat- 
ter clause  advocated  by  my  oppinent  is  a  denial  of  a  future 
state  of  rewards  and  punishments  It  presents  Universal- 
ism  in  its  most  daring  aspect,  but  only  in  that  degree  of 
turpitude  to  which  every  description  of  this  error  naturally 
leads.  Unconnected  with  materialism  as  it  certainly  is, 
in  the  phraseology  of  the  question,  this  system  would  send 
the  antediluvian  rebels  to  Heaven  before  Noah,  tiie  Sodom- 
ites before  Lot,  the  Egyptians  before  Moses,  Korah,  Dathan 
and  Abiram  before  Aaron,  the  Canaanites  before  .Joshua, 
the  blaspheming  tliief  before  the  Apostles,  and  Judas  before 
Christ.  Did  these  holy  characters  need  more  punishment 
lor  discipline,  for  repentance,  or  for  satisiaction  tlian  those 
rebels  who  died  before  them  ?  or  was  there  any  thing  in  tiie 


89 

duration  or  intensity  of  their  sufferinga,  which  would  give 
to  the  death  of  these  rebels  an  extraordinary  eftirary  ?  In 
general  their  pains  were  neither  very  tedious  nor  very  se- 
vere. The  experience  of  :uany  can  attest  that  there  is  com- 
paratively little  pain  in  drowning:  The  agony  is  in  coming 
to  again.  Whether  those  who  perished  in  the  general  de- 
luge and  in  the  Red  Sea  were  disciplined  into  holiness  by 
their  death,  we  may  conjecture  by  the  example  of  the  Ca- 
Jiaanites  and  many  others  who  suffered  much,  before  their 
deati),  and  were  only  hardened  under  tlie  means  of  soften- 
ing, and  blasphemed  God  on  account  of  their  plagues. 

The  several  systems  which  liave  been  desciibed  are  so 
nearly  related,  that  they  may  hat  hour  the  advocates  «>f  each 
other,  without  any  material  change  of  ground;  as  a  prison- 
er may  go  from  one  cell  to  another,  without  escaping  from 
confinement.  In  this  tiiey  resemble  the  x^tians  and  Socini- 
aiis,  whose  subtle  vacillations  have  been  exposed  by  Wardlaw 
of  Scotland  and  Miller  of  America.  "When  they  feel 
pressed  by  a  text  or  an  argument  which  bears  hard  on  the 
Socinian  hypothesis,  they  take  refuge  in  Arianism,  and  en- 
deavour to  maintain  that  the  ditlirulty  vanishes,  on  the  plan 
of  the  pre-existence  and  super-angelick  nature  of  Christ,  as 
held  by  Arians.  On  the  contrary,  when  pressed  by  a  pas- 
sage of  Scripture,  or  a  consideration,  w  hich  wears  an  as- 
pect unfavourable  to  Avianisni,  they  can  with  equal  dexterity 
avail  themselves  of  the  Socinian  doctrine,  and  argue  with 
the  lowest  Humanitarian."  The  youngor  Edwards  has 
shewn  that  Dr.  Chauncey  has  been  guilty  of  the  same  ter- 
giversation in  the  Universalist  controversy.  While  profes- 
sedly defending  the  doctrine  of  a  future  penitentiary  pursish- 
ment,  he  is  not  ashamed,  in  passing  certain  fortresses,  to 
hoist  the  colours  of  ihe  Destructionists.  My  opponent  also, 
in  the  206th  page  of  his  Lectures,  appears  to  adopt  a  similar 
policy,  in  order  to  escape  the  torce  of  Matt.  10:  28,  and 
Luke  12:  5,  which  direct  us  to  fear  God,  who,  "after  he 
hath  killed,  hath  power  to  cast  into  hell  '*  In  this  passage 
my  opponent  sees  two  difficulties.  One  is  that  God  hath 
power  to  cast  into  hell.  This  he  removes  in  a  note,  by  say- 
ing, "  because  God  has  power  to  destroy,  it  does  not  neces- 
sarily follow  that  he  will."  But  knowing  that  this  assertion 
is  a  direct  contradiction  of  the  word  of  God,  which  says 
that  he  will  *'  destroy  them  that  def^troy  the  earth,"  and  that 
with  an  *'  everlasting  destruction;'*  and  recollecting  also 

H 


90 

that  the  second  ililiiculty  in  tlie  text  is  that  this  takes  place, 
nu'  in  this  life,  but  "  aitn-  he  liath  killed,"  my  supple  oppo- 
nent seeks  relief  hy  resorting  to  that  very  use  of  the  word 
distroy^  wliich  gave  to  the  Destructionists  thei!*  distinctive 
appellation.  His  words  are  these  ;  •'  But  I  have  no  objec- 
tion in  the  supposition  t!«at  this  text  is  to  he  understood  in 
a  higher  sensej  and  th:.t  it  refers  to  the  sovereignty  of  G-  d, 
w!  «»  lia**  power,  as  all  will  admit,  to  renderany  being  y\\i(,m 
he  hath  made,  exlinct.  He  who  created  man,  is  able  to 
desttoy  him  in  every  sense  in  which  hcexisti  as  man."  Here 
he  pji plains  the  scriptural  threatening  of  the  destruction  of 
the  wicked,  to  mean  the  destruction  of  his  existence,  the  ex- 
tmction  of  his  being,  which  is  annihilation. 

My  opponent  is  c(pially  wavering  as  to  the  reason  Mhy 
our  Creator  punishes  the  wicked.  In  his  Lectures  and  in 
that  clause  of  the  question  w  hicli  he  has  undertaken  to  de- 
fend, he  represents  God  as  all  mercy,  punishing  the  wick- 
ed only  for  their  good,  in  that  brief  summary  of  the  Uni- 
versalist  faith  which  is  annexed  to  the  system  of  psalmody 
used  (as  I  understand)  by  that  society  in  this  place,  God  is 
represented  as  an  inexorable  judge,  without  any  forgive- 
ness except  up(m  the  ground  of  our  making  full  satisfaction 
to  the  law  by  oui*  own  sufferings.  The  words  arc  *'  We 
believe  it  to  be  consistent  with  the  character  and  govern- 
ment of  God,  and  perfectly  consonant  to  the  design  of  his 
law,  to  punish  all  wilful  oftenders,  and  to  administer  to 
every  transgression  and  disobedience  a  just  recompence  of 
reward.'*  That  my  opponent  sometimes  preaches  this  doc- 
trine of  a  condign  instead  of  a  disciplinary  punishment  may 
be  seen  In  the  ?35th  page  of  his  duidecimo  sermon  published 
in  the  pjesent  year,  where  he  declares  that  "  all  tlie  hell 
there  is,  (and  we  believe  in  all  the  jjunishment  cf  which  the 
scriptures  speak,)  is  inevitably  certain  to  the  wicked:  and 
their  portion  in  this  'lake  ofiire  and  brimstone,'  in  these 
*  sorrows  of  death,'  and  '  pains  of  I.ell,'  not  only  is,  but  ever 
will  be,  in  exact  ratio  to  the  measure  and  magnitude  of  sin. 
It  is  on  this  principle  that  God  rewards  every  man  accord- 
ing to  his  works  Tho  same  adherence  to  the  doctrine  of 
satisfactory  punishment  is  found  in  the  spuiious  edition  of 
Buck's  Theological  Dictionary.  My  opponent  has  there 
said,  u  der  tiie  article  *'  Universalists,''  that  "  they  contend 
that  the  wicked  receive  a  ^\ix\\shme,wi  proportioned  to  their 
crimes.'*    1  should  like  to  know  what  the  condign  punish- 


ment  of  the  wicked  means,  if  it  is  not  that  which  is  "  pro- 
portioned to  their  crimes,"  and  "  in  exact  ratio  to  the  mea- 
sure and  magnitude  of  sin."  When  this  is  laid  upon  an 
adequate  surety,  and  the  oifending  individual  is  pardoned, 
there  is  an  exercise  of  mercy;  '*  for  to  the  Lord  our  Gid 
behmg  mercies  and  forgivenesses,"  *'  keeping  mercy  for 
thousands,  forgiving  iniquity,  and  transgression  and  sin, 
and  that  will  by  no  means  clear  the  aiiilty.'  Yet  when  this 
punishment  is  laid  upon  the  oflenders  themselves,  and  full 
satisfaction  is  exacted  fiom  them,  however  just  it  is,  there 
is  no  display  of  mercy  intended  in  it.  In  this  plan  there  is 
no  room  foi*  Christ,  although  the  scriptures  say  *'  through 
him  is  preached  unto  you  the  forgiveness  of  sins."  My  oppo- 
nent, not  satisfied  with  thus  contradicting  the  Gospel  of 
Christ,  "  in  whom  we  have  forgiveness  of  sins,''  contradicts 
himself  intlie  \ev\  next  woj-ds  to  those  last  quoted,  by  say- 
ing *' that  punishment  iiself  is  disviptinary,  and  not  incon- 
sistent with  mercy.''  S\  'uit!  is  it  an  exercise  of  mercy  to 
inflict  upon  all  men,  in  their  own  persons,  '*  a  punishment 
proportioned  to  tiseir  crimes  ?"  Is  it  like  parental  discipline 
to  punish  all  n7en  individually  *'  in  exact  ratio  to  the  mea- 
sure and  magnitude  of  sin  ?"  Is  there  no  room  for  ♦*  repen- 
tance and  remission  of  sins/"'  "  Is  there  no  halm  in  Gilead, 
'is  there  no  piiysician  there?"  In  the  gospel  we  are  taught 
that  God  inflicts  a  condign  punishment  upon  our  Divine 
surety,  and  a  discijjlijiary  chastisement  upon  those  w!!<;se 
sins  are  fully  and  freely  forgiven  through  his  blood  :  but 
when  my  opponent,  leaving  a  Saviour  out  of  view,  attempts, 
in  the  very  same  sentence,  to  make  these  two  descriptions 
of  punishment  meet  in  the  individual  offenders,  he  shows 
either  the  most  licentious  inconsistency,  or  a  want  of  ac- 
quaintance with  the  plainest  terms  in  technical  theology. — 
Yet  great  as  the  incongruity  of  these  two  systems  is.  they 
are  not  more  at  war  with  each  other  than  they  are  vvith 
scripture  and  common  sense,  when,  as  at  present,  they  re- 
ject the  doctrine  of  future  punishment.  How  can  that  man 
be  said  to  receive  in  this  life,  either  a  disciplinary  or  a  satis- 
factory punishment  for  the  most  heinous  crime,  in  the  very 
perpetration  of  which  he  dies  instantaneously  ?  How  can 
either  of  these  punishments  be  inflicted  on  a  suicide,  in  this 
life,  for  a  crime  which,  in  the  very  act,  removes  him  beyond 
this  life? 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  shew  the  multiplied  inconsiaten- 


&2 

Gies  of  my  opponent  by  reminding  yoa  that  on  this  very 
occasion,  he  lias  added  a  penitentiary  punishment  to  the 
descriptions  mentioned  already  He  lias  promised  that  if  I 
prove  the  first  clause  of  our  question,  he  will  then  '•  prove 
that  the  punishment  of  the  sinner  is  only  temporal  and  salu- 
taiy,  to  be  succeeded  by  \\i^  reptnitatue  and  never  ending 
ha])piness.''*  Without  dwelling  on  the  impossibility  of  a 
suicide's  repenlin^i  in  i\n^  life,  of"  a  crime  which,  in  a  twink- 
ling, terminates  his  life,  I  would  observe  that  tbis  shifting  of 
the  question  from  one  system  of  Universalism  to  another,  is 
effecluallv  precluded  by  the  question  adopted  by  the  parties. 
One  of  tlie  most  remarkable  characteristics  of  a  Christian  is, 
that  he  is  willing  to  make  a  distinct  and  uiiequisocal  profes- 
sion of  his  faith  in  the  presence  of  the  universe.  But  the 
anxiety  of  my  opponent  to  secure  opportunities  of  shuffling 
has  led  him  into  a  most  pitiable,  though  abortive  attempt.f 
to  elude  the  trammels  which  our  rules  have  placed  upon 
bim,  by  confining  him  to  one  particular  scheme  of  error. 

But  why  should  he  so  repeatedly:]:  make  my  proving  the 
first  clause  of  the  question  a  prerequisite  to  his  attempting 
the  establishment  of  the  second  I  Are  they  not  substan- 
tially one  question  ?  Is  not  the  establishment  of  eternal  pun- 
ishment a  refutation  of  Universalist  limitations?  And  if  these 
limitations  be  proved,  does  not  my  system  fall  of  course  ■  The 
only  reason  why  the  second  clause  was  proposed  on  my  part, 
"was  to  compel  my  opponent  to  take  a  decided  stand  with 
that  particular  sect  and  class  of  TJniversalists  to  which  he 
chose  to  belong.  This  stand  he  has  taken  by  the  very  fact 
of  adopting  the  question.  If  the  transaction  be  insincere, 
let  the  censure  lie  upon  the  guilty  person. 

It  seems  also  strange  that  my  opponent  should,  in  the  com- 
mencement of  this  discussion, §  complain  that  my  first  half 
hour  did  not  contain  more  evidence,  and  that  heshould  throw 
the  blame  of  his  sterility  upon  my  supposed  remissness.  Let  the 
cause  be  what  it  may.  his  complaints  are  truly  doleful.  In  order 
to  the  application  of  a  remedy,  let  the  evil  be  well  understood. 
It  is  described  in  his  own  words,  as  follows,  viz  :  "  But  as  he 
has  brought  forward  nothing  for  mo  to  answer,  nothing  in 
support  of  his  argument,  I  have  nothing  to  refute.  I  do  not 
know  even  how  to  consume  my  thirty  minutes,"  "1  feel  anxious 
to  consume  my  thirty  minutes,  but  in  truth,  I  know  not  what 

•  Miniitcg,  p.  44.  -f-  Minutes,  p.  IC. 

J^inolcs,  pp.  58,  44.  §  Minutee  p.  15. 


93 

to  say.*'*  This,  then,  is  the  evil ;  he  has  nothing  to  say  ;  he 
knows  not  how  to  fill  up  his  time.  It  this  sorrow  heimputed 
to  my  mode  of  managing  the  controversy,  I  will  endeavour  to 
supply  his  deficiencies  by  the  aid  of  Univer.salist  authors,  and 
thus  give  a  better  defence  of  Universalism  than  my  opponent 
has  dor.e.  In  the  fear  of  God,  this  shall  be  done  in  a  con- 
scientious way,  by  selecting  the  several  heads  ot  argument, 
which  our  antagonists  advance  against  us,  and  by  marshalling 
their  scripture  authorities  adduced  in  support  of  these  argu- 
ments, to  the  best  advantage,  beginning  with  the  weakest 
and  ending  with  the  strongest.  This  is  not  only  the  most 
honest  but  the  most  politic  plan  ;  because  if  their  best  array 
cannot  be  defeated,  we  had  better  capitulate  at  once,  and  if 
it  can  be  overthrown,  it  had  better  be  done  immediately. 

UNIVERSALI8T  CANONS. 

Preparatory  to  this  measure,  it  is  necessary  to  pay  some  at- 
tention to  the  numerous  factitious  rules  of  exegesis  by  which 
the  Universalist  writers  deceive  themselves  and  others.  The 
proof  which  God  has  condescended  to  give  will  not  answer 
their  purpose.  They  must  have  such  as  they  choose  in  their 
sovereignty  to  demand.  The  Jews  disregarded  our  Saviour's 
miracles,  and  said,  "  let  him  now  come  down  from  the  cross 
and  we  will  believe  him."  So  these  authors  disregard  volumes 
of  plain  inspired  evidence,  and  demand  that  which  would  be 
exactly  right  to  their  perverted  judgments,  which  take  wrong 
for  right  and  right  for  wrong.  In  this  view  they  require  that 
our  proofs  should  be  drawn  from  the  right  book  aud  the  rio  ht 
part  of  the  book.  These  texts  must  be  in  a  right  style,  the 
same  as  the  context;  and  of  a  right  composition,  invulnerable 
to  heretical  conjecture.  These  rules  are  recognized  by  my 
opponent,  in  the  209th  page  of  his  Lectures,  in  a  note  which 
he  has  copied  from  the  improved  Unitarian  Version  of  2  Pet. 
2:  4,  which  informs  us  that  "  God  spared  not  the  Angels  that 
sinned,  but  cast  them  down  to  hell."  The  following' are  his 
words;  viz  **  If  God  spared  not  the  messengers  who  had 
sinned,  i.  e.  the  spies  who  were  sent  to  explore  the  land  of 
Canaan,  &c.  See  Simpson's  Essays,  p.  205,  &c.  But  if  the 
common  interpretation  be  admitted,  it  will  not  establish  the 
popular  doctrine  concerning  fallen  augels.  For,  1,  The 
epistle  itself  is  of  doubtful  authority  !  2.  From  the  change  of 
style,  this  is  the  most  doubtful  portion  of  the  epistle!  3.  By 

•  Miautes,  pp.  37, 39. 


94 

those  who  admit  the  genuineness  of  the  epistle,  this  chapter 
is  supposed  to  have  been  a  quotation  from  some  ancient 
apocryphal  book,  and  the  Apostle  might  not  mean  to  give 
authority  to  the  doctrine,  but  to  argue  with  his  readers  upon 
known  and  allowed  principles!"  So  it  seems  of  no  avail  for 
us  to  prove  the  genuineness,  authenticity  and  inspiration  of 
our  authorities,  if  even  a  nameless  heretic  can  be  quoted,  by 
whom  it  is  supposed  that  the  writer  did  not  mean  what  he 
said  !  Thus  do  these  modern  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  make 
void  the  law  of  God  by  their  traditions  and  impious  con- 
jectures. 

Besides  these  things,  they  demand  in  our  authorities,  what 
they  or  their  friends  suppose  to  be  the  right  words  and  phrases, 
subject,  and  sense  ;  with  a  right  extent  of  reference  and  ad- 
dress ;  by  a  right  number  of  authors,  and  a  right  frequency 
of  repetition ;  and  that  at  what  they  suppose  to  be  the  right 
times.  In  Hebr.  7: 16,  we  find  the  word  endless  or  indisdutu- 
ble*  in  connection  with  life.  In  the  22?id  page  of  my 
opponent's  lectures,  he  says,  "  if  this  word  could  have 
been  so  much  as  once  found  connected  with  death,  in  the 
same  manner  as  it  is  here  connected  with  life,  it  would  have 
given  more  support  to  the  doctrine  of  endless  misery,  than  all 
that  is  contained  in  the  Bible  besides."  He  now  asks,f  "  why 
did  they  [the  inspired  writers]  not  make  use  of  this  term 
about  the  meaning  of  which  there  could  be  no  dispute  ?'*  He 
makes  the  same  high  sounding  demands:J:  concerning  the 
phrase§  which  is,  in  Isa.  45:  17,  translated  world  without  end. 
He  says,  "  If  he  [his  antagonist]  can,  let  him,  find  the  passage 
in  which  the  words  are  found  in  connection  with  punishment, 
misery,  or  death,  and  again  I  say,'  I  will  give  him  the  argu- 
ment, and  our  discussion  will  end."  Thus  my  opponent  will 
not  believe  the  truth,  however  plainly  declared  in  Holy  Writ, 
unless  it  is  revealed  in  such  words  and  phrases  as  he  shall  dic- 
tate ;  and  he  takes  care  to  dictate  such  as  he  thinks  can  never 
be  found  in  that  connection.  Neither  would  he  yield,  if  all  his 
demandii  were  complied  with  ;  as  is  evident  trom  his  refusing 
so  to  do,  when  through  the  suggestion  of  a  friend,  Ps.9:5,  was 
quoted,  in  which  the  Hebrew  phrase^  used  in  connection  with 
punishment,  is,  according  to  his  own  acknowledgment,  equiva- 
lent to  the  expression  used  in  Isa.  45: 17,  in  connection  with 
happiness. 

*  axafa^roj 
J  Minutes,  p.  105.  \  Minutes,  pp.  ir.-;,  181,  252.     . 


95 

After  one  Universalist  has  directed  the  inspired  penman 
what  word  to  use,  it  is  no  wonder  that  another  should  dictate 
the  subject  of  his  whole  discourse.  Balfour,  in  the  3d  sec- 
tion ol  his  enquiry,  will  not  admit  that  (he  "  damnation  of 
hell,*'  spoken  of  in  Matt.  23:  33,  can  mean  an  eternal  punish- 
ment, because  the  whole  discourse  is  not  exclusively  confined 
to  eternal  subjects.  He  says  that  it  "  occurs  in  the  fullest 
and  plainest  discourse  ever  uttered  by  our  Lord  concerning 
th«  temporal  miseries  coming  on  the  Jewish  nation."  "  How 
comes  it  to  jjass  that  if  the  damnation  of  hell  means  eternal 
misery,  it  should  only  be  introduced  in  such  a  discourse?''  It 
might  as  well  be  asked  how  '  our  daily  bread''  can  mean  bodi- 
ly nourishment,  when  spiritual  blessings  are  evidently  the  chief 
subject  of  the  Lord's  prayer.  Throughout  the  whole  Bible, 
temporal  and  eternal  things  are  connected  as  they  are  in  1 
Tim.  4:  8,  where  godliness  is  said  to  have  the  *'  promise  of 
the  life  that  now  is;  and  of  that  which  is  to  come." 

But  if  these  writers  cannot  keep  the  Apostles  from  mingling 
different  subjects  in  the  same  discourse,  th»^y  are  determined 
to  remedy  the  evil,  by  giving  to  their  works  what  they  consider 
the  right  sense,  or  in  other  words,  by  giving  to  the  Scriptures 
whatsoever  sense  will  bestsuit  their  views  of  Universalism,even 
if  it  should  attach  to  Christ  and  his  apostles  the  charge  of  error. 
This,  in  fact,  appears  to  be  the  real  object  of  their  distinction 
between  the  theocratical  and  popular  sense  of  Scripture.  Bal- 
four in  his  2d  section,  declares  that  the  Jews  in  the  time  of 
Christ,  believed  falsely  in  future  punishment ;  and  that  our 
Saviour's  language  with  regard  to  Lazarus  and  the  rich  man, 
*'  was  only  availing  himself  of  iheiv  popular  belief,  to  she\r 
them  the  obstinacy  of  their  unbelief.''  In  the  next  section  he 
infor;iiS  us  that  all  our  Saviour's  language  concerning  Abra- 
ham's bosom,  and  the  place  of  torment  in  this  conspicuous 
passage  "is  merely  brought  in  as  a  part  of  its  imagery,"  and 
that,  on  such  subjects,  it  is  not  our  Saviour's  design  to  adher© 
"  strictly  to  the  truth  of  things."  If  by  this  distinction  or 
any  other,  Mr.  Balfour  could  prove  the  Son  of  God  a  liar,  he 
would  doubtless  be  congratulated  by  all  the  devils  in  hell,  and 
by  many  of  bis  brethren  on  earth.  Of  the  felicitations  of  one 
of  them  at  least,  he  would  be  absolutely  certain.  In  a  pam- 
phlet, entitled  "  Fresbyterianism  versus  Presbyterianism'' 
published  by  my  opponent,  in  the  year  1819,  you  find  him  as- 
serting in  the  16th  page,  concerning  the  plainest  historical 
and  doctrinal  declarations  of  Scripture,  "  all  this  is  popular 


Si6 

laiiguao-e,  aud  is  true  ouly  in  a  popular  sense  ;"  that  is  in  a 
"faise^  sense,  as  he  afterward  explains  it.  By  the  aid  of  this 
distinction,  he  inculcates  that  all  those  passages  which  are 
usually  perverted  to  the  defence  of  Unitarian  ism  anii  Uni- 
versalism  are  to  be  understood  in  the  theocratical  or  true 
sense;  and  all  those  which  convey  most  plainly  the  essential 
doctrines  of  Christianity  are  to  be  understood  in  the  popular 
or  false  sense.  Upon  the  ground  of  this  distinction,  furnished 
him  by  Mr,  Balfour,  he  asserts  "  that  God  does  whatever  his 
creatures  do,*'  that  God  "  is  not  resisted  at  ali,-"  that  "  when- 
ever the  consequences  of  the  actions  of  man  are  beyond  his 
fiiresight  or  motive,  those  consequences  cannot  be  imputed  to 
ban,  but  must  be  imputed  to  God  alone;"  that  '*  man,  consid- 
ered as  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  God,  is  altocf ether  pas- 
sive." "This  system  considers  man  as  having  nothing  to  do." 
"Man,  in  this  sense  of  speaking,  is  altoyelher  passive,  and 
acts  only  as  he  is  acted  upon."  By  this  plan,  my  opponent 
has,  in  page  IG,  ascertained  the  theocratical  faleshood  of  all 
those  passages  "  in  which  men  are  said  to  go  astra\  like 
sheep,  or  to  return  again  to  the  great  Shepherd,-  to  resist  the 
Spirit  of  God,  or  to  yield  obedience  to  his  law;  to  be  lost  or 
to  be  saved  ' ! !!  "  It  is  in  the  popular  [that  is  the  false]  sense, 
only,  that  men  can  be  subjects  of  either  praise  or  blame." 
*•  In  this  sense,  he  is  no  more  accountable  than  the  axe  is  ac- 
countable to  the  man  who  useth  it,  or  the  saw  to  the  hand 
which  shaktth  it."* 

After  my  opponent  thinks  that  he  has  hewn  down  all  the 
cedars  of  Lebanon  by  this  newly  invented  weapon,  he  sits 
down  with  the  self  complacency  of  a  certain  character  who 
"  eateth  and  wipeth  her  mouth  and  saith  I  have  done  no 
wickedness."  He  even  boasts,  in  his  22d  page,  that  he  has 
done  much  good.  "Thus,"  says  he,  "  according  to  this  sys- 
tem, being  well  understood,  and  these  rw/t^s  adhered  to  in  con- 
struing the  Holy  Scriptures,  all  those  contradictions  in  lan- 
guage, and  confusion  of  ideas,  which  are  so  obvious  in  other 
systems  of  divinity,  are  completely  done  away."  He  thinks 
that  by  denying  the  purity  of  God,  the  depravity  and  ac- 
countabiirty  of  man,  and  the  doctrines  of  perdition  and  sah'a- 
tion,  we  are  to  understand  better,  that  revelation  which  was 
given  for  the  express  purpose  of  teaching  those  very  truths 
which  he  denies !  No  wonder  that  Dr.  James  P.  Wilson, 
of  this  city,   said,  in  his   printedf   animadversious  upon 

•See  pp.  16, 18,  20,  22.  t  In  1820.  I 


97 

the  pamphlet  which  contains  these  sentiments,  that  "the 
principles  of  this  Universalist  appear  to  be  nefarious,  beyond 
a  parallel." 

But  as  this  way  of  contradicting  the  Scriptures  by  admit- 
ting their  truth  in  a  popular  sense,  is  rather  an  unpopular 
thiHg  among-  the  churches,  some  writers  have  given  to  this 
popular  or  false  sense,  a  more  plausible  name,  by  calling  it 
jyarabolical.  You  would  scarcely  expect  this  from  Mr; 
Ballbur  after  his  telling  us  that  "a  parable,  like  a  fable,  is 
designed  to  impress  on  the  mind,  in  a  pleasing  manner,  some 
important  truth"  He  admits  that  they  may  be  used  to  es- 
tablish a  "  particular  doctriue.  of  Christianity  "  but  prudent- 
ly remarks  that  '*  the  utmost  caution  should  be  observed  in 
reasoning  from  them,"  for  this  purpose.  Yet  when  becomes 
to  examine  a  particular  case,  instead  of  establishing  a  "  doc- 
trine of  Christianity,"  or  discovering  an  •*  important  truth,"  he 
takes  it  for  granted  that  the  dialogue  between  Abraham  and 
the  rich  man  is  *'  a  fiction"  and  pretends  that  thus  far  we 
agree  with  him ;  and  he  charges  us  with  inconsistency  for 
believing  in  opposition  to  him,  that  the  account  of  the  rich 
man  being  in  torment  is  *' a  fact,'*  In  the  next  paragraph 
he  gives  this  assumed  position  that  the  narrative  is  paraboli- 
cal as  one  reason  why  we  should  not  believe  *'  what  is  said 
about  Hades  being  a  place  of  torment.''  In  another  place, 
he  says  concerning  the  rich  man,  '♦  But  if  this  is  only  a  sup- 
posed person^  I  ask  those  who  may  differ  from  me,  to  prove 
that  the  person  is  a  real  being.  If  they  advocate  the  torment 
to  he  a  reality,  they  ought  first  to  prove  the  person  tormented 
in  Hades  to  be  not  a  parabolic  per  son,  before  they  draw  the 
conclusion  that  the  torment  is  not  aparabolic  torment.  The 
first  must  be  proved  before  the  last  can  be  admitted;  for  a 
person  must  exist  before  he  can  be  tormented  in  any  place. 
If  the  person  mentioned  is  a  real  beinq,  and  the  torment  he 
complains  of  a  reality,  and  not  ^fictitious  or  parabolic  re- 
presentation, we  have  a  right  to  demand  why  every  thino-  ia 
this  account  is  not  considered  a  narrative  of  facts,  and  not  a 
parable:*  According  to  this  extract  from  one  of  mv  oppo- 
nent's favourite  authors,  a  parable  cannot  be  a  narrative  of 
facts;  aparabolic  representation  in  a  fictitious  representation, 
and  nothing  can  be  truly  predicated  of  a  parabolical  person, 
because  he  is  only  a  supposed  person,  and  not  a  real  being. 
Isjhis  like  impressing  "  upon  the  mind,  in  a  pleasing  man- 
•  Section  2d, 


Qei,  huuic  iui[jortant  truth  ?"  This  rule  was  iuvented  to  stamp 
with  the  seal  o^  fiction,  e\er\  important  irvth  which  stands  in 
the  way  of  the  heretic.  By  this  rule  Mr.  BaHou,  in  his  first 
Lecture  on  the  Parables,  proved  that  fhe  axe  which  "  is  laid 
unto  the  root  of  the  trees,"  will  not  even  penetrate  the  outer 
bark,  much  less  prostrate  theui  in  the  iire.  In  his  second,  he 
has  shewn  that  there  is  no  danger  of  the  wicked  being  con- 
sumed like  chaff  in  unquenchable  fire;  and  in  his  third,  that 
they  need  not  fear  having  their  bodies  cast  into  hell  as  a  place 
of  torment.  All  these  passages  of  Scripture  are,  in  his  view, 
parabolical,  and  fictitious  of  course.  For  the  same  reason, 
he  and  my  opponent  reject  our  Saviour's  account  of  the  day  of 
judgment,  which  Mr.  i3allou,in  the  174th  page  of  his  Treatise 
on  Atonement,  has  styled  the  "  parable  of  the  sheep  and 
goals."  He  also  thinks  that  he  has  closed  the  impassable  gulph, 
not  as  Curtius  did,  (for  he  is  probably  more  like  the  Jewish 
rich  man,  than  the  Roman  hero,)  but  by  pronouncing  it  a 
parable,  that  is,  a  fiction. 

But  let  us  apply  the  rirlc  as  held  by  these  characters,  to 
some  familiar  cases.  Mr.  Balhm  has  not,  1  believe,  told  us 
that  the  ten  commandments  wcie  apaii\ble,  hut  he  might  as 
\V'>1!  have  done  it,  as  to  have  made  a  fiction  of  Luke  \\y.  18, 
*'  Whosoever  putteth  away  his  Vvife,  and  marrieth  another, 
committeth  adultery;  and  \\hosoever  marrieth  her  that  is 
put  away  from  her  husband,  committeth  adultery."  This 
is  Mr.  Ballou's  37th  parable.  Of  course  he  must  consider 
tlie  husband  and  w\^e  parabolical  persons,  and  not  real  beings. 
Then  all  that  is  said  about  marrying,  divorcing,  and  mar- 
rying again,  is  only  ajictitious  representation.  Would  not 
this  make  void  the  law  of  (rod  '?  Besides  much  doctrinal 
and  practical  instruction,  vn  c  have  in  the  78th  Psalm,  a  long 
and  strictly  true  histoi-y  of  God's  people  for  many  hundred 
years.  But  in  the  second  verse,  the  inspiied  writer  calls  it 
a  parable.  Is  it  therefoi-e  a  Jiclion  ?  In  the  ^8d  and  24th 
chapters  of  Numbers,  the  Spirit  of  God  foretells  tlie  future 
habitation,  increase,  prosperity  and  triumph  of  his  people 
Israel,  and  the  advent  and  kingdom  of  Christ.  The  inspir- 
ed vvritej*  repeatedly  calls  these  j)redicti(»ns  a  parable.  Be- 
cause Israel  is  mentioned  in  a  parable,  had  this  people  no 
real  existence  ?  Was  the  star  that  should  come  out  of  Jacob 
ou\y  a"*  supposed  person,''*  or  an  imaginary  being?  And 
was  his  coming  a  mere  fictitious  representation  ?  But  re- 
member that  it  was  not  mine  positively  declared  that  Christ 
should  come,  and  his  people  prosper,  than  that  his  cneniieq 


99 

should  perish  forever.  In  the  20t!i  verse  of  tlic  24th  chapr 
tei",  the  histoiian  says,  "  aM(l  wlien  he  hxiked  on  Ainalok, 
he  took  up  his  parable,  and  said,  Am;ilek  was  the  first 
of  the  nations,  hut  his  latter  end  shall  he  that  he  perish 
forever'*  To  deny  the  truth  of  these  parables  could  be  ex;i 
pected  from  none  hut  an  infidel,  and  in  Proverbs 2(»:  7,  Solo,- 
nion  assures  us  that  no  wise  man  will  lame  them,  by  believ- 
ing a  part  to  be  truth  and  a  part  fiction.  *'  The  legs  of  the 
lame  are  not  equal  ;  so  is  a  parable  in  the  mouth  of  fools." 

But  we  have  aheady  obsei-ved  that  atiother  of  their  rules 
of  exposition  is  that  a  scriptural  declaration  must  have  a 
right  extent  of  reference  and  address.  My  opponoit  says,* 
*'  the  jtunishment  of  Gehenna  is  never  threatened  to  the 
Gentiles."  He  denies  that  Christ  ''threatened  with  the  ]um- 
ishrnent  of  Gehenna,  any  others  than  Jews."  Mi-.  Balfour 
says  "that  not  a  word  about  Hell  or  Gehenna  is  said  to 
the  Gentiles  by  any  of  the  inspired  writers."  He  says  *'  that 
all  that  is  said  about  Gehenna  in  the  way  of  threatening  or 
in  any  other  shape  was  spoken  to  Jevks :  JeviS  and  they 
only  were  ti»e  persons  addressed  wlien  speaking  of  Gehen- 
na It  is  not  once  named  to  the  Gentiles  in  all  the  New 
Testament,  nor  are  any  of  them  ever  threatened  with  such 
a  punishmcuf't  Their  object  is  to  shew  that  hell  (h)es  not 
mean  the  eternal  misery  of  every  unbeliever,  but  only  the 
temporal  calamities  of  the  Jewish  nation,  in  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem.  To  prove  this  they  state  what  need  not  be 
disputed,  that  the  inspired  discouiscs  about  Gehenna  were 
addressed  to  Jews  only.  Their  conclusion  is.  thai  these  dis- 
courses refer  to  them  only  According  to  this  rule  no  part 
of  the  Bible  can  relate  to  Ireland  or  Fhiladel])hia,  because 
not  addressed  to  their  inhabitajits.  Most  of  tlic  ^Scriptures 
were  originally  addressed  to  the  Jews,  yet  a  great  portion 
of  ihem  refer  eitiier  expressly  or  implicitly  to  the  Gentiles. 
Can  it  be  supposed  that  the  poor  in  spirit,  the  meek,  the 
mou!  nei-s,  the  merciful,  the  peace-makers,  the  pure,  and  th« 
persecuted  among  the  Gentiles,  cannot  be  happy  because 
the  beatitudes  were  addressed  to  the  Jews?  Our  Saviour 
once  said  to  ceitain  Jews,  '<  He  tiiat  helieveth  and  is  bap- 
tised shall  be  saved,  but  he  that  helieveth  not  shall  bedanui- 
ed."  Because  this  was  not  addressed  to  Gentiles  personal- 
ly, have  they  therefore  no  part  in  either  salvation  or  dam- 
nation ?  Our  Saviour  intimates  that  those  who  are  unwilling 

*  Minutes,  p.  177. 
4:  Settion  '2d  and  3d. 


100 

to  part  with  an  offending  hand,  or  foot,  or  eye,  shall  "be 
cast  into  Ijell,  into  the  fire  that  never  shall  be  quenched." 
Are  none  but  Jews  unwilling  to  forsake  their  sins^  If  Gen- 
tiles resemble  them  in  character,  they  must  part.ike  of 
their  punishment.  Our  Saviour  says  to  the  Jews,  "  \  c  ser- 
pents, ye  generation  of  vipers  !  how  can  ye  escape  the  dam- 
nation of  hell  ?"  Are  no  serpents  and  vipers  to  be  found 
among  the  Gentiles  ?  I  should  guess  that  all  the  hissing 
wl)ich  we  have  had  against  the  truth  in  this  house  has  not 
Come  from  Jews.  If,  then,  unbelievers  of  all  nations  are 
the  Children  of  the  old  serpent,  it  may  be  truly  said  of  them, 
that  they  cannot  escape  the  damnation  of  Gehenna.  Neither 
will  it  avail  in  proof  that  Gehenna  relates  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem,  to  say,  as  Mr.  Balfour  has  done  in  his 
4th  section,  that  John,  who  wrote  after  that  event,  "omits  all 
our  Lord's  discourses  in  which  it  is  mentioned  ;"  since  he 
has  also  omitted  the  sermon  on  the  Mount  and  the  apostolic 
commission  above  quoted,  and  many  olher  things  which  re- 
late to  Heaven  as  well  as  Hell,  to  salvation  as  well  as  per- 
dition. 

It  has  already  been  announced  that  the  Universalist  polem- 
ics require  that  our  proofs  should  be  uttered  by  what  they 
esteem  a  right  number  of  authors,  a  right  frequency  of  re- 
petition, and  at  the  right  times.  My  opponent,  on  this  sub- 
ject, speaks  as  follows  :  Paul  "  never  once  made  use  of  this 
term  Gehenna  or  hell  in  all  his  preaching.  Ah!  Paul,  have 
you  preached  the  whole  counsel  of  God  ?  and  yet  we  can- 
not find  this  wonderful  term  in  all  your  preaching  ! ! !  Now 
my  hearers,  I  ask  you,  how  could  Paul  preach  the  whole 
counsel  of  God,  and  yet  not  preach  the  Gehenna  or  hell  of 
my  opponent,  if  this  doctrine  oHiell  be  contained  in  any  jjart 
of  the  counsel  of  God?"*  Although  Mr,  Balfour  admits 
that  our  Saviour  threatened  unbelieving  Jews  with  the  dam- 
nation of  hell,  yet,  in  his  4th  section,  he  sees  no  reason  even 
for  them  to  fear,  because  the  Apostles  "  were  commanded  to 
preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature,"  and  "they  addressed 
the  worst  of  characters,  but  to  none  of  them  did  thei/  ever 
say,  how  can  ye  escape  the  damnation  of  hell  V*  To  prove  the 
same  point  he  tells  us  in  chaj).  2.  sect.  2,  "  that  the  word 
Gehenna  or  hell  is  used  by  our  Lord,  and  by  James,  but  by 
no  other  person  in  the  New  Testament."  Near  the  close  of 
Section  4th,  he  says,  "  Now  let  it  be  supposed,  that  by  this 

♦  Minute*,  p.  17&. 


101 

expression,  our  Lord  meant  endless  misery  in  h  future  state. 
I  ask  is  it  possible  our  Lord  should  only  mention  this  once? 
I  ask  again,  can  it  be  believed,  that  he  who  said  on  the 
cross,  *  Father  forgive  them,  for  they  know  not  what  they 
do,'  should  have  ceased,  but  with  his  dying  breath,  to  warn 
these  men  that  such  a  place  of  endless  misery  awaited  them? 
I  ask  once  more,  is  it  possible  that  he,  who,  when  he  beheld 
the  city,  *  wept  over  it,'  on  account  of  tempoial  calamities, 
in  which  it  was  soon  to  be  involved,  should  shed  no  tears  in 
anticipating  the  endless  misery  of  its  wicked  inhabitants  ?" 
From  this  it  would  appear  that,  with  such  chaiacters,  the 
authority  of  our  Lord,  or  of  an  inspiied  Apostle  is  not  suf- 
ficient.    They  will  believe  nothing  but  what  has  been  de- 
clared by  all  the  sacred  college,  very  often,  on  all  import- 
ant occasions,  and  especially  in  the  hour  of  death.     In  the 
second  section  of  Balfour's  first  chapter,  he  leaves   "it  to 
any  candid  man  to  say,  if  Hades  be  a  place  of  torment  after 
death,  whether  our  Lord  would  only  mention  this   once." 
In  the  same  section  of  the  next  chapter,  he  asks,  "  how  is  it 
to  be  rationally  accounted  for,  that  our  Lord  o/</y  oric^ during 
his  whole   ministry,  should   say  to  the  unbelieving  Jews, 
*  how  can  ye  escape  the  damnation  of  hell?'    if  by  this  he 
meant  future  eternal   punishment  ?"    The  same  question 
might  be  asked  concerning  Paradise  as  a  place  of  happiness, 
although  the  one  time  that  our  Saviour  used  this  word  was 
in  his  dying  hour.    Yet  it  is  evident  that  those  who  will  thus 
limit  the  Holy  One  will  not  believe  when  all  their  arrogant 
demands  are  complied  with :  for  his  unl>elief  still  continues, 
although,  according  to  his  own  acknowledgment,*  Gehenna 
is  twice  called  in  Mk.  9th, '  the  fire  that  never  shall  be  quench- 
ed.'     He  observes  that  "  properly  speaking,  this  expression 
occurs  no  less  than  five  times ;  for  it  is  three  times  said,  by 
way  of  addition,  *  where  their  w  orm  dieth  not  and  the  tire  is 
not  quenched."    In  another  place,+  he  appears  to  think  that 
twelve  repetitions  are  not  sufficient  to  entitle  their  authors 
to  credit.     His  words  are  the  following ;  viz,  "  Admitting 
for  the  present,  that  it  occurs  twelve  times,  and  in  all  these 
it  is  certainly  used  to  express  a  place  of  eternal  misery,  it 
deserves  notice,  that  this  is  not  so  often  in  the  whole  Bible, 
as  it  is  used  by  many  preachers  in  a  single  sermon ;"  and 
he  might  have  added,  as  Mr.  Balfour  repeats  this  miserable 
subterfuge,  in  a  single  chapter. 

♦Chap.  1,  Sect.  3. 
t  Chap.  1,  Sett.  2, 


102 

LNtVERSALIST  PRACTICE. 

Having  said  thus  much  of  their  principles  of  interpretation, 
by  wliich  they  have  imposed  upon  themselves  and  others,  a 
w  ord  or  tw  o  concerning  theii*  practice  may  not  be  improj)cr. 
Although  their  antagonists  may  accompany  their  sciipture 
authorities  with  elaboiate  explanations  and  arguments,  they 
scruple  not  to  accuse  them  of  quoting  naked  texts,  \\  itb.out 
argument :  yet  when  it  suits  their  purpose,  they  can  glory 
in  pervei'ting  detached  passages  of  scripture  without  expla- 
nation. In  the  201st  page  of  Mr.  Ballou's  Treatise  on 
Atonement,  he  says  "  Time  would  fail  me,  to  ^^Tite  one  half 
that  might  be  quoted  from  the  piophcts  on  this  subject.  I 
ask  for  no  explanation,  on  their  testimony  ;  if  what  they  say 
do  not  prove  my  doctrine,  I  will  not  have  recourse  to  expla- 
nations." As  he  is  a  professed  writer  on  dark  sayings,  pro- 
veibs  and  parables,  he  ought  to  know  what  w as  revealed  to 
Solomon  in  the  introduction  to  his  I'roverbs ;  \a hcie  \\q  are 
taught  that  it  is  the  part  of  a  learned  man  who  has  attairicd 
to  "  wise  counsels,  to  understand  a  proverb,  and  the  inler- 
pretation,  the  words  of  the  wise  and  their  dark  sayings." 
My  opponent,  however,  incorrectly  attributes  to  me  as  a 
crime,  the  very  thing  of  which  his  favourite  boasts  so  vain^ 
lyj  and  lest  he  should  not  be  believed  for  the  Mant 
of  sufficient  repetition  he  gives  it  to  us  often  enough.  lie 
accuses  his  antagonist  of  stating  texts  "  without  any  argu- 
ment to  pi'ove  his  interpretation  of  them  correct ;"  of  bring- 
ing "  text  after  text  without  attempting  to  prove  his  intei'- 
pretation  of  tliem  to  be  correct  by  fair  argument ;"  of  giv- 
ing "  passage  after  passage  without  any  argument  or  expla- 
nation j"  of  giving  "a  continued  series  of  quotations  without 
any  argument  to  prove  the  meaning  wiiich  was  attached  to 
them."  &c.  &c.  &c.*  These  groundless  assertions  appear 
intended  to  reduce  his  antagonist  to  a  level  with  a  man  who 
repeatedly  confesses  that  he  has  not  wherewith  to  occupy  his 
sluggish  periods. 

There  is  one  very  remarkable  feature  in  the  practice  oi' 
my  opponent.  Sometimes  he  can  scarcely  converse,  preach 
or  print,  without  a  perpetual  recurrence  to  the  dead  langua- 
ges. A  sermon  published  by  him  this  year,  is  quite  richly 
interlarded  with  Hebrew.  In  this  wonderful  production,  he 
tries  to  give  the  people  some  acquaintance  with  Hebrew  ra- 
dicals.    In  a  note  he  informs  them  of  the  distinction  in  the 

*  Minntcs  pp.  272,  181, 216,  230,  77,  58. 


103 

.genders  of  Hebrew  nouns ;  and  what  must  have  been  very 
important  to  tliose  who  did  not  know  one  letter  from  anoth- 
er, lie  informs  them  that  "  the  reader,  must  read  all  He- 
brew woi'ds  fi'om  right  to  left."*  He  has  refen-edf  to  de- 
bates which  he  has  had  in  the  Commissionei^'s  Hall  v^lth 
J  ay  men  and  apprentice  boys.  These  men  were  more  remark- 
able for  honesty  and  good  sense  than  for  biblical  literature. 
It  is  well  known  that  he  was  in  the  habit  of  appealing  to  the 
original  scriptures  with  such  disputants  as  could  not  follow 
him  thither.  Tliis  he  does  in  letters  written  to  one  of  these 
apprentice  boys,  dated  Feb.  14th  and  Marcli  8th,  of  the  pre- 
sent year.  In  the  latter  of  these  he  parades  his  several  La- 
tin versions,  the  same  literary  ware,  which,  like  a  pedlar 
with  his  pins  and  needles  and  buttons  and  combs,  he  has  dis- 
played before  this  assembly.  Having  endeavoured  in  vain 
to  weaken  the  confidence  of  his  young  correspondent  in  our 
common  version,  and  to  get  him  to  adopt  my  opponent's  new 
translation,  which  he  ridiculously  pretends  is  a  correct  trans- 
lation of  Griesbach's  Greek  Testament,  he  plainly  lets  him 
know  in  a  letter  of  Feb.  16th,  that  he  must  admit  Griesbach, 
of  which  he  knew  not  one  word,  or  their  correspondence 
-should  close.  "  Then"  says  he,  "  have  I  put  an  end  to  this 
discussion.":|:  After  thus  making  the  sacred  originals  a 
sine  qua  non  to  a  discussion  with  a  youth  who  knew  nothing 
•f  tliem,  he  proposed  to  me,  in  the  commencement  of  our  dis^ 

*  See  his  18mo :  Compendium  of  a  Sermon,  p.  IS.Also,  in  the  126ih  page  of 
the  Minutes,  Mr.  Jennings  has,  in  a  note,  given  us  a  good  deal  of  Greek  and 
Hebrew,  accompanied  with  the  following  instructions  for'those,  who  like, himself, 
could  not  read  these  languages,  viz.  "  The  Hebrew  words  which  are  written  in 
tlie  Hebrew  characters,  are  read  from  right  to  left.  These  remarks  may  be  of 
some  use  to  the  unlearrred,  and  for  iliera  alone  they  are  designed."  As  it  is  a 
notorious  fact,  and  one  which  has  been  publicly  acknowledged,  that  Mr.  Jen- 
nings never  read  nor  wrote  a  word  of  Hebrew  or  Greek  in  his  life,  it  is  easy  to 
see  that  this  note  was  penned  by  tiie  same  wiseacre  who  wrote  the  Comppudium 
of  a  Sermon.  Yet  Mr.  Jennings  begins  the  note  by  saying  that  "  the  Reporter 
writes  the  Hebrew  without  the  points."'  This  is  a  worthy  disciple  of  a  man  who 
expects  to  teach  unlearned  readers  to  pronoimce  his  "  Hebrew  words  which  ai"e 
written  in  Hebrew  characters"  by  simply  telling  them  that  these  words  "  are 
read  from  right  to  left."  It  would  not  be  a  greater  evidence  of  that  in\becility 
to  which  the  understanding  is  reduced  by  an  overweening  pedantry,  if  he  were  to 
expect  a  land-lubber  to  navigate  a  frigate  from  here,  to  England,  by  being  simply 
informed  that  he  was  to  sail  from  West  to  Ea«t. 

t  Minutes  p.  43. 

1^  See  "  Letlera  of  Coj-respondence  between  the  Rev..  Abner  Kneeland  and 
WTWiaoi  Justice.'' 


104 

cnssion,  that  we  should  lay  them  aside,  and  abide  by  our 
received  Translation:  !* 

REFUTATION. 

The  exposure  now  made  of  my  opponent's  canons  of  cri- 
ticism, and  his  practice,  and  that  of  his  brethren,  in  contro- 
verting the  truth,  may  be  considered  at,  answer  to  a  great 
part  of  what  they  preach  and  write  on  the  question  between 
us.  Their  doctrines  remain  unsupported,  when  their  prin- 
ciples of  interpi-etation  arc  pi-oved  essentially  wrong.  That 
cause  is  always  suspected,  whose  advocates  frequently  shift 
their  ground ;  who  fill  up  their  time,  not  by  answering  their 
opponent's  arguments,  but  by  groundless  complaints  that  he 
has  none ;  and  who  make  a  great  flourish  of  learning  among 
the  illiterate,  and  yet  retreat  from  the  light  among  those  who 
can  consult  originals.  That  their  cause  ought  to  be  suspect- 
ed and  condemned,  that  their  doctrine  is  without  evidence, 
will  appear  by  a  full  and  fair  examination  of  the  arguments 
advanced  by  themselves  in  its  defence.  With  the  help  of 
God,  this  shall  be  done  under  the  following  heads.  1.  The 
present  character  and  sufferings  of  mankind.  2.  The  offer  of 
salvation.  3.  Arguments  for  a  purgatory.  4.  Restitution.  5. 
The  Attributes  of  God.  6.  His  fatherly  chastisements.  7. 
The  will  of  God.  8.  9.  10.  Christ's  Prophetic,  Kingly,  ancj 
Priestly  offices. 

FIRST  UNIVERSALIST  ARGUMENT. 

A  wi'iter  of  some  name,  against  the  Universalists,  gives 
the  following  division  of  their  sources  of  argument.  "  1.  The 
universal  goodness  of  God.  2.  The  universal  atonement  of 
Christ  3.  The  universal  offers  of  salvation.   4.  The  univer- 

•  Inthe  Minutei  pp.  256,  272,  Mr.  K.  in  opposition  to  his  repeated  deelara- 
tions  that  I  had  no  argument,  acknowledges  that  tliere  were  some  argument  and 
aorae  eriticisiii  on  my  part  ;  yet  he  seems  to  think  it  "  not  necessary"  for  me 
"  to  say  any  thing  more  about  the  meaning  of  certain  Greek  words."  Before  the 
debate  he  was  so  anxious  to  make  t/ie  nnleartied  acquainted  with  aioiiioti,  hades, 
g-ef-enna,tartarut,  &nd  RH»oi.,that  he  couhl  not  wait  to  teach  them  the  alphabet 
befoi-e  he  would  have  them  reading  from  right  to  left.  It  is  said  that  some  of  his 
followers  were  in  the  habit  of  escaping  any  argument  or  te.it,  by  crying,  "Mr. 
Kneeland  says  it  is  not  so  in  the  Greek."  \t  that  time,  he  thought  our  Bible  so 
imperfect  as  to  need  his  New  Translation  and  all  hi»  other  critical  labours.  How 
much  his  mind  was  changed  during  the  debate,  will  appear  from  an  account  of  it 
which  he  published  a  few  days  after,  in  which. he  says  scornfully  "  there  was  an 
aionian  fight  about  the  words  '•""'^5  ximw.ov,  Q^^t^  See.  which  was  mostly  lost  to 
the  audience,  and  which  ended  ne«rly  where  it  commenced."  He  says  moreover, 
"  No  rational  roan  can  believe  any  thing  essential  to  salvation  which  is  nolplain- 
(y  and  cleanly  revealed,  and  which  depends  On  Bomethiiig  better  thati  ench  eqtti- 
vnoal  terms  for  its  support." 


105 

sal  goodness  of  mankind.  5.  Their  universal  punishment  in 
this  lite."  His  two  hist  divisior.s  I  malce  my  first;  because 
they  are  the  wealiest  and  tiie  least  relied  upon  by  their  ad- 
vocates. A  single  case  is  not  now  recollected  in  which  they 
have  tirged  them  at  all;  and  il"  they  were  to  insist  that  all 
men  are  good,  wc  couhl  only  say  with  the  Spirit,  "there  is 
none  good;"  and  the  same' Spirit  declares  that  some  sins 
shall  not  be  forgiven;  *•  neither  in  tliis  world,  neither  in  the 
world  to  come:''  so  that  punishment  in  this  world,  whetlicr 
pai'titil  or  universal,  does  not  preclude  a  future  punishment. 
SECOND  UNIVERSALIST  ARGUMENT. 
The  arginnent  drawn  from  the  offer  of  salvation  cannot 
be  more  fairly  treated  tlian  by  admitting  that  salvation  is 
offered  to  alfw ho  hear  the  gospel,  and  are  willi;ig  to  be 
saved  in  God's  appointed  way.  But  the  mere  invitation  to 
the  supper  mentioned  in  Luke  14tli,  did  not  avail  those  who 
made  excuses,  and  concerning  whom  it  was  said,  ''that  none 
of  those  which  were  bidden  shall  taste  of  my  supper." 

THIRD  UNIYERSALIST  ARGUMENT. 

As  it  is  a  fixct  that  many  Universalists  advocate  a  sort  of 
purgatory,  a  concise  notice  will  be  taken  of  those  texts  which 
are  erroneously  thought  to  countenance  that  doctrine. 

1.  Isa.  4:  4.  "When  the  Lord  shall  have  washed  av,ay 
the  filth  of  the  daughters  of  Zion,  and  shall  have  purged  the 
blood  of  Jerusalemfrom  the  midst  thei-eof  by  the  spirit  of 
judgment  and  the  spirit  of  burning."  This  is  explained,  in 
Isa.  31:  9.  48:  10,  where  it  is  dci  lared  that  the  Lord's  "fire 
is  in  Zion  and  his  furnace  in  Jerusalem ;"  and  that  his  people 
are  chosen,  or  as  some  copies  ha^  e  it,  they  are  tried,  "  in  tlie 
furnace  of  afliiction." 

2.  Zech.  9:  11.  "As  for  thee  also,  by  the  blood  of  thy 
Covenant,  I  have  sent  fortli  thy  prisoners  out  of  the  pit 
wherein  is  no  water."  Concerning  a  temporal  captivity,  Isa. 
51:  14,  uses  the  following  similar  language.  "  The  capthe 
exile  hasteneth  that  he  may  be  loosed,  and  that  he  sliould 
not  die  in  the  pit,  nor  that  his  bread  should  fail."  T'i© 
Israelites  owed  to  the  blood  of  the  Great  Covenant  Sacrifice, 
their  deliverance  from  Egypt  and  Babylon  a  well  as  their 
preservation  fi'om  Tophet. 

3.  1  Cor.  3:  13-15.  "Every  man's  work  shall  be  made 
manifest,  for  the  day  shall  declare  it,  because  it  shall  be  re- 
realed  by  fire,  and  the  fire  shall  try  every  man's  work,  of 
what  sort  it  is.     If  anv  man's  work  abideth,  which  he  hath 

'  O 


106 

Luilt  thi'iTiipoH,  lie  shaJl  receive  a  reward.  If  any  man's 
work  sliall  be  burnt,  he  shall  suffer  loss;  but  he  himself  sluiU 
be  saved,  yet  so  as  by  fire."  The  following  arc  vei*ses  9,  12. 
'•  For  we  are  labourers  together  with  God.  Ye  are  God's 
husbandry,  ye  arc  God's  building.  Now  if  any  man  build 
upon  this  foundation,  gold,  silver,  precious  stones,  wood,  liay, 
stubble.*'  Here  tlie  otHcers  of  tiic  church  are  said  to  build  it 
«p  of  good  and  bad  members.  When  the  building  is  assailed 
by  the  fire  of  persecution,  the  wood,  hay,  and  stubble  are 
consumed;  that  is,  hypocrites  apostatize,  while  the  faithful 
pastor  and  the  souml  niembers,  the  gold,  silver,  and  precious 
stones,  endui'c  the  flame,  and  shall  be  saved  or  refined  and 
preserved,  yet  so  as  by  or  through  the  fire. 

4.  1  Pet,  3:  9,  '•  By  whom,"  (tiiat  is,  the  Spirit,  see  verse^ 
18,)  "  By  whom  also  he  w  ent  and  preaclied  unto  the  Spirits 
in  prison."  That  these  spirits  were  in  hell  at  the  time  of  th« 
Apostle's  wi'iting  is  agreed.  But  that  they  were  in  piison 
when  the  Spirit  of  a  long-suffering  God  preached  salvation 
to  them,  is  disi)uted  on  the  authority  of  the  next  verse,  which 
confines  the  long-suffei'ing  of  Goi^  iii  respect  of  them,  to  the 
days  of  Noah,  aiul  confines  the  salvation  of  God  to  the  few, 
that  is  to  the  eight  souls  w hich  were  in  the  ark,  Vei'se  20, 
**  which  [spirits  now  in  prison]  sometime  [that  is  long  ago] 
were  disobedient,  wiien  once  [that  is  long  ago]  the  long- 
suffering  of  God  w  aited  in  the  days  of  Noah,  while  the  ark 
was  aprepai'ing,  wherein  few,  that  is  eight  souls  were  saved 
by  water."  If  salvation  was  preached  to  them  in  hell  or  af- 
ter their  death,  why  should  the  long-suffering  of  God  be  thus 
restricted  in  their  case,  to  "the  days  of  Noah  while  the  ark 
was  a  preparing  ?" 

FOURTH  UNIVERSALIST  ARGUMENT. 

Mr.  Ballou,*  in  shewing  "  that  all  will  be  brought,  finally, 
to  the  enjoyment  of  spiritual  life  and  jjcace,"  says,  "  Ther* 
is  a  passage  in  Acts  3:  20,  21,  which  reads  xQvy  literally  iiji 
proof  of  my  ai'guuient.  *  And  he  shall  send  J  esus  Christy 
w  hich  befoi'e  w  as  pi*eached  unto  }  ou,  w  bom  the  heaven  must, 
receive  until  the  times  of  restitution  of  all  things,  which 
God  hath  spoken  by  the  moutli  of  all  his  holy  proj>hets  since 
the  world  began."  As  the  word  apokatastasisf  here  render- 
ed restitution,  occurs  only  once  in  the  New  Testament,  and 
not  once  in  the  Se])tuagint,  there  may  apj)ear  great  room 
for  fanciful  and  erroneous  interpretations.    Yet  in  the  70  of 

•  Treatrae  on  Atonement,  p.  193.  t  «:TM*T«o-TKr'=- 


107 

Amos  5: 15,  we  find  a  conjugate  used  in  connection  with  the. 
judgment  oi  civil  coints  on  eartii,  in  cxartiy  the  same  meaning 
which  the  word  has  in  Acts  3:  '21,  in  reltition  to  the  judgnier.t 
of  the  last  day.  The  prophet  says,  "Hate  evil  and  love  good, 

KAI  APOKArASlbShTh  EN  FULAlS  Kill  M  A.  ;f  and  esiabiish 
judf/ment  m  the  ya(ys:^  In  Acts  1:11,  it  is  said  that  Christ 
"shall  so  come  in  like  manner  as  ye  have  seen  him  go  into 
heaven."  In  the  passage  in  question,  it  is  said  tliat  tlie  Lord 
shall  send  him;  and  that  this  sending  and  coming  shall  be  at 
the  ^QVxwXoiWwrestitatiotu  or  comliiu lion,  or  esialdislwtenfy 
or  seUldhtent,  or  (ons.inmatwn  of  all  tliings.  In  I  Cor.  15: 
24,25,  \\e  find  that  one  feature  of  t!iis  important  settlement 
is  the  restitution  of  "  the  kingdom  to  God,  cAen  the  Fathei-;'* 
and  another  is,  shall  we  say  a  restitution  ofalleneniies  to  the 
bosom  of  the  Redeemer?  No;  but  at  that  period,  he  shall  have 
"put  all  enemies  under  his  feet;"  '•  and  these  shall  go  away 
into  everlasting  punishment,  but  the  righteous  into  life  eter- 
nal." It  is  true  that  Mr.  Ballon  and  my  ojiponent  who 
quote  this  prophecy  of  refer  concerning  the  restituti'on  of 
all  things,  deny  that  a  general  judgment  shall  ever  take 
place.  But  the  same  Apostle*  has  predicted  this  denial  also, 
w^hen  he  says  "that  there  shall  come  in  the  last  days,  scof* 
fers,  walking  after  their  own  lusts,  and  saying,  where  is  the 
promise oikis  coming'.'" 

FIFTH  UNIVERSALIST  ARGUMENT. 
As  it  is  believed  that  God*s  holiness,  justice  and  truth  re- 
quire the  eternal  punisliment  of  incorrigible  offenders,  and 
that  the  scriptiii-es  limit  the  application  of  his  love,  mercy,  and 
grace  accordingly,  the  consideration  of  these  attributes  shall 
be  postponed  to  my  first  argument  in  favour  of  future  pun- 
ishment. We  shall  in  the  mean  time  attend  to  \\  hat  is  urged 
from  God's  fore-knowledge,  his  immutability,  and  his  bei;ig 
the  God  of  universal  creation  and  providence.  Although  Win- 
chester;]: thinks  that  the  argument  from  God's  universal  pro- 
vidence "  has  weight  in  it,"  and  professes  to  give  the  authori- 
ty of — 1st,  the  American  Indians,  and  iidly,  the  Apostle  Paul, 
in  support  of  it ;  yet  he  says, "  this  I  do  not  insist  upon."  It  is 
hoped,  therefore,  that  I  shall  be  excused  from  insisting  upon  a 
sophism  which  can  as  well  refute  the  doctrine  of  present  suf- 
fering, as  of  eternal  punishment.  As  he  supports  the  argu- 
ment from  the  universal  creation  only  by  a  perversion  ot* 

*    2    Pet.  3-  3     4.  f  Xal  arO>tXT«TTII«-«Tt   IV  avXXly  K{lf<» 

\  Uis  Universal  Restoration,  dialogue  4th. 


108 

Isa.  57:  16,  which  is  a  promise  to  the  church  of  Christ,  that 
j)a>;sago  may  be  attent'etl  to  among  others  of  the  same  descrip- 
tion, uihler  the  9th  argument,  to  w  hich  it  propei'ly  belongs. 

Isi  Mr.  Winchester's  4tli  (liah>gue,  he  jnolcsses  to  dispUiy 
the  sti'ong  hohis  of  Univei'salism.  I.  God  is  tlie  universal  and 
only  creatoi'of  all.  2.  The  universal  bcp.evolenceofthe  Dei- 
ty, or  love  of  God  to  his  creatures.  3.  Christ  died  for  all.  4. 
The  unchangeableness  of  God.  o.  The  imuuitability  of  God's 
cou)isels.  t>.  God  hfitji  given  all  things  into  the  hand  of 
Christ.  7.  The  scriptures  must  be  fuKillcdj  the  scriptures 
camiot  be  broken.* 

The  .Jdof  these  arguments  will  be  my  last.  The  6th,  the 
one  before  the  last.  Tise  ist  and  2d  have  been  already  post- 
poned. Tlie  texts  under  his  5tl.  liead  shall  be  generally  consi- 
dered under  my  7  th  and  9th.  1  o  his  4t!!,  5th,  and  7th,  it  may 
noM  be  briefly  ansv.  ered  that  because  we  believe  in  the  truth  of 
God's  M'ord,  and  the  innnutability  of  the  counsels  of  an  un- 
unchangcable  God,  therefore  we  <'.fclare  that  the  wicked  "shall 
go  into  ever(asfm</  punisiiment,  and  the  rigliteous  into  ever- 
lusiiny  life :"  for  this  is  declared  by  tJiat  God  whose  nature 
and  counsels  cannot  change,  and  by  those  scriptures  which 
*'  cannot  be  broken." 

The  argument  from  the  fine-knowledge  of  God  has,  not- 
withstanding its  dai'ingim{)ictY,  been  ui'ged  vei'y  much,  to  my 
own  knowledge,  even  by  the  followers  of  Winchester,  wiio  are 
generally  esteemed  the  better  sortofUniversalists,  and  some- 
times appear  to  be  almost  christians.  Mr.  Ballou  declares 
that  if  "the  Almiglity"  knew  "before  he  made  man"  "  that 
he  would  deserve  an  endless  punishment,"  "Ht  proves  that  an 
injimte  crmity  existed  in  Gud!  T  The  only  reason  why  this 
profane  language  is  repeated,  is  that  it  has  been  taken  for  sol- 
id argument,  by  some  who  did  not  consider  that  if  it  be  cruel  to 
foie-know  eternal  punishment,  it  must  be  cruel,  only  in  a  less 
degree,  to  fore-know  tem])oral  suffering,  \\  ithout  j)reventing 
it.  "Man  is  born  to  trouble  as  the  s])arks  fly  upward."  The 
God  of  j)rovidence  foresees  all  his  temporal  sins  and  sorrows,f 
and  the  God  of  judgment  fore-knows  all  his  eternal  sins  and 
sufferings  :\,  yet  this  <hjes  not  attach  an  infinite  degree,  no 
the  least  degree  of  cruelty  to  the  immaculate  character  of 
.Tehovah:  and  that  blasphemer  who  can  say  thatit  does,  needs 

•  Did  Mr.  Jennings,  in  the  22d  page  of"  his  Report,  give  me  this  last  argumoit, 
to  make  nie  talk  as  childiilily  as  Mr.  Winchester  ? 
t  2  Kings,  8;  la  13. 
%  M*tt.  25;  4i,  46. 


109 

not  a  mark  in  his  forehead  to  convince  all  tender  clu'istianfc 
tliat  he  is  an  enemy  to  revealed  religion. 

SIXTH  UNIVERSALIST  ARGUMENT. 

Fatherly  Chastisements.  My  oppoiicnt  has  quoted  the  fol- 
lowing passaj^es.  Job.  5:  17.  "  Behold  !  happy  is  the  man 
whom  Goti  coiiectetli,  thercfnre  despise  not  the  chastening  of 
the  Almia;litv."  Prov.  3:  12.  ••  For  \\  horn  the  Lord  loveth  lie 
correcteth,  even  as  a  father  tiie  son  in  whom  he  dclighteth.^'* 
My  opponent  observes,!  "'althoiigli  the  Father  of  all  mercies 
has  said  [Ps.  89:  :32,33.]  that  he  will  visit  the  transgressions 
of  his  children  •  with  the  rod,  and  their  iniquity  with  stripes/ 
he  adds.  *  nevertheless,  my  loving  kindness  will  1  not  utterly 
take  from  him,  nor  suffer  my  faithfulness  to  fail.'  And  again, 
Hebr.  1*2:  9 — 11,  *  Furthermore,  we  have  had  fatiiers  of  our 
flesh  which  corrected  us,  and  we  gave  them  reverence  ;  shall 
we  not  much  rather  be  in  subjection  nnto  t'le  Father  of  our 
spirits,  and  live?  For  they  verily  for  a  few  days  chastened 
US  after  their  own  pleasure  ;  but  he  for  our  profit,  that  we 
miglit  be  partakers  of  his  holiness.  Now  no  chastening  for 
the  pi'esent,  seemeth  to  be  joyous  but  grievous  ;  nevertheless 
afterward  it  yieldeth  the  peaceable  fruit  of  righteousness 
nnto  them  which  are  exercised  thereby."  The  inference 
which  my  opponent  would  have  us  draw  from  these  and  simi- 
lar passages  is,  that  none  can  be  punished  forever,  because  this 
would  be  to  their  inexpressible  injury;  wiiereas  in  these 
texts,  God  is  represented  as  viewing  all  mankind  in  the  light 
of  children,  and  as  correcting  them  in  loving  kindness,  that 
they  may  be  profited  by  a  growtli  in  holiness,  righteousness 
and  happiness. 

But  in  each  of  the  chapters  from  which  the  above  texts  are 
taken,  there  is  CNidence  that  these  tilings  are  said  of  the  pious 
and  not  of  all  mankind.  In  Job  5:  12 — 14,  we  find  that  he 
who  corrects  his  children  for  their  good,  also  "taketli  the 
wise  in  tlieir  own  craftiness  ;  and  the  counsel  of  the  froward 
is  carried  headlong."  In  Prov.  3:  32 — 35,  we  find  that  •*  the 
froward  is  abomination  to  the  Lord  ;"  "  the  curse  of  the 
Lord  is  in  the  house  of  the  wicked  ;"  ''he  scorneth  the  scorn- 
ers;"  *'  shame  shall  be  the  promotion  of  fools:"  and  in  other 
passages  of  scripture,  this  shame  is  said  to  be  "  a  j)ei'petual 
shame,"   and    an   "•'everlasting    confusion."]:   In  the  bi^th 

♦Minutes,  p.  140. 
t  Minutes,  p.  180. 
%  Jer.  20;  11.     23;  40. 


110 

'Psalm*  we  are  taught  that  God's  cliildrcn  whom  he  covircts 
are  those  who  know  the  joyful  soimd  oi'justicc  ami  jiuii^Lieiit, 
mercy  and  truth;  who  Malk  in  the  light  of  his  countenance  ; 
V  ho  I'ejoice  in  his  name  all  the  day  ;  and  are  exalleti  in  his 
righteousness,  and  not  their  own  :  t!>at  is,  they  aie  ];ersons 
who  are  Justified,  adopted  and  sanctified  through  grace.  (_  on- 
cerning  others  he  says  in  vej-se  lOtli,  "  thou  hast  scattered 
thine  enemies  with  tliy  strong  arm."  Hebrews  l:;^;  H,  tells  us 
that  these  enemies  are  not  children  but  bastai-ds,  and  ai-e 
therefore  let  alone,  as  Ephraim  was  when  joined  to  his 
idols.  Verses  5th  and  7th  imply,  as  many  other  scriptures 
plainly  declare,  that  tliese  bastards  do  not  entluie  the  chas- 
tening of  tlie  Lord  either  ^^  ith  l'e^  erence  or  fortitude,  but 
first  despise  it  and  then  faint  under  it ;  whereas  his  childi'i  n 
are  suppoi-ted  under  it,  and  profited  by  it. 

SEVENTH  UNI  VERS  ALI  ST  ARGUMENT. 

The  will  of  God.  As  we  are  now  entering  upon  tlie  strong 
holds  of  Universalism,  in  which  time  and  labour  nuist  be 
spent  to  present  their  system  in  the  most  adAantageous  light, 
let  it  be  remarked  that  when,  in  the  name  of  the  adversary, 
the  orthodox  are  chai'ged  with  denying  scripture,  it  is  not  to 
be  understood  that  the  charge  is  admitted  on  our  part :  neither 
are  tlie  Universalists  to  be  understood  as  making  this  cojifes- 
sion,  when,  either  now  or  hereafter,  1  lay  such  errors  at  their 
door.  With  this  explanation,  it  may  be  said  that  the  orll)o- 
dox  limit  to  a  part  of  mankind,  that  "good  will  towards  nun" 
which  the  angels,  at  the  birth  of  Christ,  proclaimed  to  belong 
*'  to  all  people."t  Orthodoxy  says  tliat  God  wills  the  death 
of  the  sinner;  but  in  Ez.  33:  11.  18:  23.  32,  "  IJiave  no  plea- 
sure in  the  death  of  him  that  dieth,  saitli  the  Lord  God,  wliere- 
fore  turn  yourselves  and  live  ye."  The  scriptures  say  in  2 
Pet.  3:9.  "  The  Loi-d  is  not  slack  concerning  his  promise,  as 
some  men  count  slackness,  but  is  long  suffei-ing  to  us  wai'd, 
not  willing  that  any  should  perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to 
repentance."  Does  not  Orthodoxy  say,  that  he  is  willing  that 
many  sliould  be  lost  without  i-epentance  ?  The  Bible  assures 
us  in  1  Tim.  2 :  4,  that  God  "wi7/havc  all  men  to  be  saved,  and 
to  come  unto  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  :"  Whereas  Ortho- 
doxy says  that  he  ivill  have  only  some  men  to  be  saved,  and 
the  rest  to  perish  without  knowledge.  In  vain  will  they  en- 
deavoui'  to  escape  the  force  of  these  declarations  by  distin- 

•  See  Yerses  1*~16,  28— 3«, 
t  Luke  2:  10,  U, 


Ill 

guisliing  between  God's  secret  and  revealed  will,  for  he  does 
not  contradict  liimsclf  and  speak  deceitfully :  a)jd  as  to  their 
admission  that  it  is  his  will  of  precept  only,  and  not  his  will  of 
j)urpose  that  all  nien  should  he  saved,  is  not  this  in  direct  op- 
position to  his  own  word,  in  Eph.  1 :  9  —  11,  where  it  is  said 
that  he  hath  "  made  known  unto  us  his  ivUL  accordi)ig  to  his 
(jood  pleasure  \\\\\Q\\\\(t.  liatli /^M/7^05ft/ in  himself,  that  in  the 
dispensation  of  the  fulness  of  times,  he  might  gather  together 
in  one  all  things  in  Christ,  both  which  are  in  Heaven,  and 
which  are  on  Earth,  even  in  him;  in  whom  also  we  have  ob- 
tained an  inheritance,  being  /?/€(/e«<m<<<e</ according  to  tlie 
purpose  of  him  who  worketh  all  things  after  tlie  counsel  of  his 
own  wiiL'*  Here  God  is  said  to  gatiier  together  in  one  all 
things  in  Christ.  Does  not  this  mean  that  he  will  save  all 
men  ?  But  this  is  said  to  be  accoi-ding  to  his  will;  "  accoi-d- 
ing  to  ins  good  pleasure  which  he  haih  purposed  in  himself;" 
accoi-ding  to  his  purpose  of  predestination,  and  the  eounsel  of 
his  own  wiL."*  On  these  grounds  wef  confidently  argue  that 
G(*d's  will  of  pui'pose  is  always  accomplished  ; — that  it  is  his 
will  o( purpose  that  all  men,  universally  shall  be  saved; — and 
that  therefore,  all  men  universally  shall  be  saved. 

The  texts  ali'eady  adduced  are  given  in  proof  that  it  is 
God's  will  of  purpose  that  all  men  universally  shall  be  saved. 
The  only  difficulty  therefore  which  can  remain  is,  to  prove 
that  his  will  of  purpose  is  always  accomplished.  But  this  is 
acknowledged  by  the  standards  of  the  Orthodox,  and  the 
above  passage  from  Ephesians  which  says  that  God  '•  work- 
eth all  things  after  the  counsel  of  his  own  will"  is  produced 
by  the  Presbyterian  Confession  of  Faith,  Chapter  3,  Section 
5,  to  prove  it.  To  support  the  1st  Section  of  the  same  Chap- 
ter they  have  quoted  Romans  0 :  1 5,  1 8,  also,  which  is  much 
to  our  purpose,  "  I  will  have  mercy  on  whom  I  will  have 
mercy,  and  I  will  have  compassion  on  whom  I  will  have  com- 
passion." "  Therefore  hath  he  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have 
mercy."  Speaking  of  God's  creatures,  the  £nd  section  of  the 
2nd  diapter  declares  that  lie  "  hath  most  sovereign  dominion 
over  them,  to  do  by  them,  for  them,  and  upon  them,  whatso- 
ever himself  pleaseth."  In  support  of  this  most  certain  truth, 
they  quote  Dan.  4  :  25,  35.  ♦*  The  Most  High  ruleth  in  the 
kingdom  of  men,  and  giveth  it  to  whomsoever  he  will ;  and  all 
the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  arc  reputed  as  notliing ;  and  he 

♦  ForJohaC:  39,  see  argument  9th,  to   which  it    belongs  in  fommon   'with 
tbe  sevenih. 

t  Tke  Uoiversalists. 


112 

doetli  according  to  bis  xoill  in  the  army  of  heaven,  and  among 
the  inhabitants  of  the  earth,  anil  none  can  stay  his  hand,  or 
say  unto  him,  what  doest  thou?"  God  says,  in  Isa.  46:  10, 
*'  My  counsel  shall  stand,  and  I  will  do  all  my  j)leasvreJ* 
God's  will  of  purpose  is  the  desire  of  his  heart,  the  determina- 
tion of  his  divine  mind.  It  is  sovereign  and  immutable  and 
cannot  be  tln\arted.  Job,  2S  :  13,  "  He  is  in  one  mind,  and 
who  can  turn  him  ?  and  what  his  soul  desireth,  even  that  he 
doeth." 

In  answering  the  above  argument,  the  Orthodox  need  not 
oppose  the  sovereignty  of  God.  Most  conscientiously  do  I 
agree  %^  ith  the  Bible  and  the  Confession  of  Faith,  that  his  will 
of  purpose  is  always  accomplished.  But  although  my  op- 
ponent at  this  moment,  professes  the  same  doctrine,  to  serve  a 
turn,  he  has  in  other  stages  of  the  debate,  filled  up  his  weari- 
some minutes  by  holding  it  up  to  the  derision  of  the  audience. 
Neither  shall  I  explain  the  above  texts  by  saying,  as  Mr.  Bal- 
lon has  attributed  to  us,*  tliat  they  are  '•  expressive  of  God's 
revealed  v,\\]»  but  not  of  his  sea  el  will;  arguing  that  his  re- 
vealed will  is  in  direct  oj)position  to  a  will  which  he  has  seen 
fit  not  to  reveal."'  His  i-evealed  word,  though  not  a  full  de- 
velopement  of  his  seci'et  will,  is  nevcrtlieless  perfectly  consis- 
tent with  it.  Yet  as  his  commands  are  often  broken,  and  thus 
his  mandatory  m  ill  not  always  fulfilled,  it  is  called  his  will 
ofpreeept  to  distinguish  it  from  his  will  of  purpose  which  is 
ever  fulfilled.  For  this  fiistinction  we  have  plain  authority 
in  many  scriptures  where  there  is  a  certain  ivill  of  God  wliich 
is  expressly  declared  not  to  be  done.  Luke  12  :  47.  "'And 
that  sei'vant  which  knew  ids  Lord's  will  and  prepared  not- 
himself,  neither  did  according  to  his  will.'''  Matt.  21  :  31. 
"  Whether  of  them  twain  did  the  will  of  his  father  ?  They  say 
unto  him  the  first."  It  is  ijlainly  imjJie*'.  that  the  second  did 
not.  Now  that  will  oi  God  which  this  second  son  did  not 
pei'form,  and  which  the  ahf)ve  mentioned  servant  did  not  per- 
form, cannot  be  the  desire  of  Ins  heart,  or  the  determination 
of  his  soul,  or  his  will  of  purpose  ^  because  this  is  always  per- 
formed :  but  it  must  be  his  law,  or  his  conmiandments  of  what- 
soever descri])tion,  which  we  therefoi-e  call  his  will  oi precept 
and  which,  though  like  theii'  author,  holy.  Just  and  good,  aj'e 
often  disi-egarded.  It  is  to  this  that  our  Saviour  must  have 
referred  when,  in  weeping  over  Jerusalem,  he  said  '"  how  oft 
did  I  U/77/,"  (as  it  is  literally  rendered,) "  how  oft  did  I  will  t© 

*  On  Atonement  p.  203. 


113 

gather  thy  children  together  as  a  lien  gathereth  her  chickens 
under  her  wings,   and  ye  would  not !"     Because  of  their 
"  would  nol,^-  his  precepts  were  disregarded,  while  his  divine 
purposes  were  accomplished  in  tlieir  just  destruction.     So  it 
is  with  regard  to  most  of  the  texts  quoted  concerning  the  will 
of  God  for  the  salvation  of  all.     In  Ez.  18:  S2,  God  took  no 
pleasure  in  the  death  of  him  that  dieth ;  yet  he  did  die,  as 
every  persevering  unheiiever  must  forever.     In  the  next  au- 
thority quoted,  the  Apostle  Peter  tells  us*  that  "  the  Lord  is 
not  wiliing  that  any  should  perish."     If  this  were  his  will  of 
piirposey  none  would  ever  perish :  yet  the  same  Apostle  tells 
us  in  the  same  epistlef  that  some,  "  as  natural  brute  beasts, 
made  to  be  taken  and  destroyed,  speak  evil  of  the  things  that 
they  understand  not,  and  shall  utterly  perish  in  their  own  cor- 
ruption."    The  Apostle  Paul  tells  us:}:  that  "the  preaching  of 
the  cross  is  to  them  iXvAi perish  foolishness."     But  Peter  tells 
us  moreover  that  it  is  God's  will  "  that  all  should  come  to 
repentence."     If  this  he  the  desire  of  his  heart,  then  all  must 
and  will  repent:  but  if  it  be  only  his  will  of  precept^  some  may 
violate  this  will,  and  remain  impenitent.     That  this  is  the 
fact,  Paul  teaches  ;^f    "  For  it  is  impossible  for  those  who 
were  once  enlightened"  "if  they  shall  fall  away,  to  renew 
them  again  unto  repentance.''''     Therefore  this  will  of  God 
tiiat  they  should  repent,  must  be  his  command.     This  is  so 
evidently  the  meaning  of  such  passages,  that  M*Knight, 
who  is  generally  very  cautious  in  admitting  any  important 
truth,  manifests  on  this  subject  an  unusual  degree  of  candour 
and  even  gives  the  word  command  instead  oiwill  in  his  trans- 
lation of  1  Tim.  2 :  4.     "  Who  commandeth  all  men  to  be 
saved,  and  to  come  unto  the  knowledge  of  the  truth."     If  it 
were  not  his  precept  but  the  determination  of  his  soul,  all 
men  would  be  saved,  and  all  would  come  to  the  knowledge 
of  the  truth.     But  God  says,  in  Hosea  4 :  6,  "  My  people 
are  destroyed  for  lack  of  knowledge;"  and  in  John  5:  29, 
"they  shall  come  forth,  they  that  have  done  good  unto  the 
resurrection  of  life,  and  they  that  have  done  evil  unto  the  re- 
surrection of  damnation."    Since,  therefore,  some  are  damn- 
ed and  not  saved ;  since  some  are  destroyed  for  lack  of  knowl- 
edge instead  of  coming  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  God's 
will  on  this  subject  must  be  that  oi  precept  and  not  o{ pur- 
pose.    The  same  doctrine  is  established  by  Rom.  9:  15,  18^ 

*  2   Peter  3:  9. 
+  2  PeL  2  :  13. 
+  1  Cor.  1:  18, 
K  Heb    S'.  4—6, 

P 


H4 

(luoteil  against  us,  let  the  will  of  Goil  in  Uiat  passage  be  un- 
derstood as  it  may.  After  saying  that  God  hath  '•  mercy  on 
whom  he  will  have  mercy,"  the  Apostle  adds  by  way  of  con- 
ti'ast,  "  and  ^hom  he  will,  he  hardencth." 

The  only  remaining  text  advanced  against  us  under  this 
liead  of  argument,  is  Eph.  1:  9 — 11.  where  it  is  said, "that 
in  the  dispensation  of  the  fulness  of  times,  he  might  gatiier 
together  in  one,  all  things  in  Christ,  both  which  are  in 
heaven,  and  Avhich  are  on  earth,  even  in  him."  This  gath- 
ering of  all  things  in  Christ,  is  acknowledged  to  be  accord- 
ing to  God's  ivill  ofpurposen  as  asserted  by  my  opponent,  and 
pi'oved  by  the  verses  immediately  preceding  and  following 
the  10th  just  now  quoted.  On  this  subject  there  is  no  dis- 
pute, and  my  opponent  might  have  saved  himself  mucljt  un- 
necessary labour*  by  passing  it  over  as  a  thing  admitted  by 
both  parties.  The  only  question  is,  what  is  meant  by  this 
gathering  of  all  things  in  Christ  wiiich  is  to  take  place  in  the 
dispensation  of  tlie  fulness  of  times  ?  My  opponent  has  iden- 
tified it  with  "  the  times  of  restitution  of  all  things,"t  alrea- 
dy explained  in  our  5th  Universalist  argument.  If  this  be 
cori'ect,  and  I  believe  it  is,  then  this  gathering  of  all  things 
in  Christ  is  that  restoring,  constituting,  establishing,  or  set- 
tling of  all  things,  which  shall  take  place  at  the  general  judg- 
ment, when  there  shall  be  a  restoring  of  "  the  kingdom  to 
God,  even  the  Father,"  and  when  he  shall  "put  all  enemies 
under  his  feet."  Not  only  is  the  innumerable  multitude  of 
the  redeemed  called  "  all  things,"  by  the  Apostle,  but  in  this 
same  chapter,  he  speaks  of  tiiesc  enemies  upon  w^hom  he 
tramples,  by  the  same  general  description  of "  all  things." 
Verses  22.  23.  "And  hath  put  all  t/iings wnder  his  feet,  and 
gave  him  to  be  the  Head  over  a//  fluv(/s  to  the  church,  which 
is  his  body,  the  fulness  of  him  that  filleth  all  in  all."  Here 
are  two  very  different  classes  of  mankiiid,  and  each  of  them 
is  called  "  all  things."  The  first  "  all  things"  which  our 
heavenly  conqueror  puts  under  his  feet,  we  are  informed  by 
the  same  Apostle  in  1  Cor.  15:  26,  constitutes  thcbody  of  his 
enemies.  The  second  "  all  things"  constitutes  "the  church 
which  is  his  body;"  "  for  we  arc  members  of  his  body,  of  his 
flesh  and  his  bones."  as  the  same  epistle  declares.^  Now 
although  we  read  of  Christ  gathering  tlie  members  of  the 
<'luu'ch  invisible  into  his  arms  as  the  shepherd  does  the  lambs, 

•  Minutes,  {n>.  202,  293. 
t  Minutes  p.  293. 
X  5:  30, 


115 

and  of  his  placing  them,  in  the  great  day  of  i-estitution,  on 
his  right  hand,  as  shecj),  we  never  once  read  of  ids  putting 
them  under  his  feet.  The  scriptures  expressly  inform  us 
that  this  treatment  is  given  to  emmi'^s,  botli  by  Ood  and  man. 
The  amount  of  this"  authority  which  has  been  cited  against 
us,  when  taken  with  its  context,  appears  to  be  this ;  tiiat  it  is 
God's  will  of  purpose  that  when  the  trump  of  judgment  shall 
sound,  Christ's  mystical  body  which  was  before  divided^ 
a  part  being  in  heaven  and  a  part  on  the  earth,  sliall  be  gath- 
ered in  one.  and  that  those  who  liave  not  obtaijied  that  pie- 
destinated  inheritance,  mentioned  in  the  lith  vei'se,  shall  ac- 
cording to  the  22nd,  be  put  under  his  feet.  The  argument 
then,  from  that  class  of  texts  which  relates  to  the  will  of  God, 
instead  of  proving  Univei-sal  Salvation,  proves  only  that  the 
invisible  church,  the  body  of  believers,  shall  be  saved,  while 
the  synagogueof  Satan,  the  enemies  of  the  Divine  Redeemer, 
shall  be  lost  forever.  The  Apostle's  saying,  as  in  the  10th 
verse,  that  God  will  gather  "  all  things"  in  Christ,  is  no  bet- 
ter evidence  for  universal  salvation,  than  his  saying,  as  in 
verse  22nd,  that  he  shall  put  ''all  things"  under  his  feet,  is 
proof  of  universal  damnation.  But  as  the  scriptures  are  con- 
sistent and  not  contradictory,  we  may  and  ought  to  explain 
this  to  mean,  as  the  Bible  uniformly  declares,  that  he  that 
believeth  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be 
damned. 

EIGHTH  UNIVERSALIST  ARGUMENT. 

Christ's  Prophetic  Office. — When  he  speaks  to  his  follow- 
ers of  his  being  with  them,  he  says,  in  John  12:  35,  *'  the 
light  is  with  you;"  that  is,  with  the  Jews:  but  in  Acts  26: 
18,  he  sends  Paul  to  the  Gentiles,  "  to  open  their  eyes,  and 
to  turn  them  from  darkness  to  light."  In  Luke  1:  79,  he  is 
said ''  to  give  light  to  them  that  sit  in  darkness  and  in  the  sha- 
dow of  death;"  and  in  Luke  2:  32,  he  is  called  "a  light  to 
lighten  thy  Gentiles  and  the  glory  of  thy  people  Israel." 
Neither  does  this  light  shine  in  vain,  but  it  dispels  the  dark- 
ness, and  illuminates  the  world  universally.*  It  is  said,  in  1 
John,  2:  8,  "  the  darkness  is  past,  and  the  true  light  now 
shine th."  In  Ephes.  1:  8,  it  is  written,  "  ye  were  sometimes 
darkness,  but  now  are  ye  light  in  the  Lord."  On  this  sub- 
ject Mr.  Bailout  quotes  Isa.  49:  G.  "And  he  said,  it  is  a  light 
thing  that  thou  shouldest  be  my  servant  to  raise  up  the  tribes 

♦  Say  the  Universalists. 
t  Oa  Atonement,  p.  2U0. 


llf) 

of  Jacob,  and  to  restore  the  preserved  of  Israel  ;  I  will  also 
give  thee  ibr  a  light  to  the  Gentiles,  that  thou  niayest  be  my 
salvation  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth/'  'J'o  the  same  amount, 
Ml-.  Murray  repeatedly*  quotes  Habb.  2: 14,  **  For  the  eaith 
shall  be  filled  with  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God,  as 
the  waters  cover  the  sea."  But  none  appears  more  pointed 
than  Jolm  1:9,  '*  That  was  the  true  light  Avhich  lightcth 
every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world."f  Compare  this  with 
the  4th  verse,  and  you  \\ill  see  that  this  is  a  quickening,  sav- 
ing light,  *'In  him  was  life,  and  the  life  was  the  light  of 
men."  In  the  text  just  quoted  from  Isaiah,  this  light  is  iden- 
tified with  saltation.  In  Acts  26:  1 8,  we  are  taught  that  turn- 
ing them  from  darkness  to  light,  is  the  same  as  turning  "  them 
from  the  power  of  Satan  unto  God,  that  they  may  receive 
forgiveness  of  sins,  and  inheritance  among  them  which  are 
sanctified."  JS'ow  let  it  be  observed  that  in  consequence  of 
this  saving  light,  the  above  authorities  prove  that  "  the  dark- 
ness is  past,"  that  those  who  "  were  sometimes  darkness," 
are  now  "•  light  in  the  Loi-d  ;"  that  "  the  eai-th  shall  be  filled 
^vith"  this  light,  even  "  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth ;"  euibja- 
cing  Jews  and  Gentiles,  even  "every  man  that  cometh  into 
the  world."  The  amount  of  the  evidence  is  this ; — Christ 
saves  all  whom  he  enlightens  ; — but  he  enlightens  all  univer- 
sally ; — Thei-efore  all  universally  shall  be  saved. 

A  great  poi-tion  of  the  plausibility  of  the  above  argument 
is  owing  to  the  texts  being  detached  from  their  connection. 
Examine  them  as  they  are  found  in  the  Bible,  and  the  illu- 
sion vanishes.  It  will  then  appear  that  tlie  minor  proposition 
of  the  above  syllogism  is  unsupported  in  scripture.  It  is 
hardly  necessary  to  mention  tliat  a  more  correct  translation, 
probably,  of  John  1:  19  is  ''  That  was  the  true  light,  which 
coming  into  the  world,  enlighteneth  every  man."  Certain  it 
is,  that  his  coming  into  the  world  is  recognized  in  all  the 
passages  quoted,  as  the  occasion  of  this  extraordinary  diffu- 
sion of  light.  Its  being  extraordinary  at  his  advent,  is  itself 
a  denial  of  its  aiitecedent  universality.  At  his  coming,  it  is 
said  "  the  darkness  is  ])ast,"  but  befoi-e  he  came  "  to  tur)i 
them  fr-om  darkness  to  light,"  the  nations  had  sat  for  four 
thousand  years  "  in  darkness  and  the  shadow  of  death;"  and 
in  this  moral  darkness,  many  millions  had  passed,  without 
hope  or  comfort,  "through  the  dark  valley  and  shadow  of 

♦  Universalism  Vindicated,  pp  49,  75. 

t  John  6;  45,  is  not  here  nuticed,  because  it  was  more  convenient  to  give  in  the 
Qth  argument  the  force  ot  the  word  aU  on  which  the  Universalist  cause  hangs . 


117 

deatli."    When  lie  told  his  followers,  "  The  light  is  witii 
you,"  as  in  the  first  text  quoted  in  their  I'avour,  he  let  them 
know,  that,  as  it  had  lately  come,  it  ^^(^uld  soon  disappear, 
unless  they  profited  by  it.  ''  Tlicn  Jesus  said  u.nto  them,  yet 
"a  little  while  is   the  ii()ht  with  yon:  wal'v  while  ye  have 
"  tiie  ligiit,  lest  darkness  come  upon  you  :  for  he  that  walkcth 
"  in  dai'kness,  knowetli  not  whither  he  goetli.    Whileye  have 
"  the  light  ^e/icre  in  the  light,  that  ye  may   be  children  oi 
•*  light.''*    From  this  it  would  api)ear  that  e\  en  after  tiie  ligiit 
has  come,  men  are  liable  to  walk  in  datkncss  and  be  chil- 
dien  of  darkness;  and  that  this  will  be  their  ciiaracter;  unless 
they  believe  in  the  light.     In  tiie  second  authority  quoted  in 
their  favour.f  Christ  promises  **  to  open  their  eyes,  and  to 
"turn  them  from  darkness  to  light,  and  trom  the  power  of 
"'  Satan  to  God,  that  they  may  recei\  e  forgiveness  of  sins, 
*•  and  an  inheritance   among  them  which  are  sanctified  by 
*^ faith  that  is  in  me.''''     These  last  words  deny  the  univer- 
sality of  this  light,  unless  it  can  be  shewn  that  all  men  living, 
or  at  least,  all  men  dying,  are  sanctijied  by  faith  in  Christ. 
The  same  is  taught  in  the  context  of  the  passage  from  John,i 
"  But  as  many  as  received  him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to 
become  the  sons  of  God,  even  to  them  that  believe  on  his  name; 
which  are  borUf  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  ilesh,  nor  of  the 
will  of  man,  but  of  God.''''  But  did  they  all  believe  on  him  ? 
Did  they  all  receive  him?  The  context  says,§  "the  light  shineth 
in  darkness,  and  the  darknes  comprehended  it  iu)t."  "  He  came 
unto  his  own,  and  his  own  received  him  not."  Are  those  per- 
sons enlightened  who  hate  their  brother,^  or  who  refuse  to 
receive  Christ  and  his  Gospel  ?  "To  the  law  and  to  thetes- 
"  timony :  if  they  speak  not  according  to  this  word,  it  is  be- 
"  cause  there  is  no  light  in  them."**  "  In  that  day  shall  the 
deaf  hear  the  words  of  the  Book  [precious  book  !]  and  the 
"  eyes  of  the  blind  shall  see  out  of  obscurity,  and  out  of  dark- 
"  ness."tf  But.thissame  prophet  Isaiah,]:|  pronounces  a  woe 
upon  some  in  his  day,  who,  like  my  opponent,  took  *'  dark- 
ness for  light,  and  light  for  darkness."     To  such  our  Sa- 
viour says,§§  "  if  therefore,  the  light  that  is  in  thee  be  dark- 
ness, how  great  is  that  darkness !"  This  rejection  of  the 

•John  12;  35,36. 
t  Acts  26;  18. 
^:  John  1;  12,  IS. 
4  Verses  5,  11. 
i  4  John  2;  9. 
**rsa.  8;  20. 

ft  Isa.  29;  18.  a  Isa.  Sj  20. 

4§MaU.  6;  25. 


118 

light,  and  evil-eyed  perversion  of  tlie  truth,  he  declares  to  be 
a  subject  of  just  condemnation,  and  a  proper  cause  of  eter- 
nal punishment.  »•  And  this  is  the  condemnation,  that  light 
*'  is  come  into  the  world,  and  men  loved  darkness  rather  than 
"light,  because  their  deeds  were  evil."*  "Then  said  the 
*'  King  to  the  servant,  bind  him  hand  and  foot,  and  take 
*•  him  away,  and  cast  him  into  outer  darkness ;  there  shall 
"  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth."t  "Raging  waves  of  the 
"  sea,  foaming  out  their  own  shame ;  ^^  andering  starvS,  to 
"  whom  is  reserved  the  blackness  of  darkness  forever.''''^  If 
all  men  universally  are  savingly  enlightened,  how  comes  it 
that  some  "  are  in  darkness,  even  until  now  ?"§  that  some 
have  "  no  light  in  them?''  that  there  are  some  who  take 
darkness  for  light  ?  some  whose  very  light  is  darkness,  and 
great  darkness  ?  How  comes  it  tliat  there  ai'e  some  wlmse 
condemnation  is,  that  they  have  "  loved  darkness  rather  than 
light  ?"  and  whose  punishment  is,  that  they  are  to  be  cast 
**  into  outer  darkness,"  and  into  *'  the  blackness  of  darkness 
FOREVER  ?" 

NINTH  UNIVERSALIST  ARGUMENT. 

Christ's  Kingly  Office. — Do  not  the  Scriptures  represent 
Christ  as  destroying  the  works  of  the  Devil,  and  trampling 
all  evil  under  his  feet  ?  "  For  this  purpose,  the  Son  of  God 
"was  manifested,  that  he  might  destroy  the  works  of  the 
"  Devil."^  "  He  hath  put  all  enemies  under  his  feet.  The 
"  last  enenjy  that  shall  be  destroyed  is  death.  For  he  hath 
**  put  all  things  under  his  feet,.''''  "  Behold  I  shew  you  a  mys- 
"  tery  :  we  shall  not  all  sleep,  but  we  shall  all  be  changed, 
^^  in  a  moment,  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  at  the  last  trump : 
"for  the  trumpet  shall  sound,  and  the  dead  shall  be  raised 
**  incorruptible,  and  we  shall  be  changed.  For  this  corrupti- 
*'  ble  must  put  on  incorruption,  and  this  mortal  must  put  on 
"  immortality.  So  when  this  corruptible  shall  have  put  on  in- 
"  corruption,  and  this  mortal  shall  have  put  on  immortality, 
'*  then  shall  be  brought  to  pass  the  saying  that  is  written,  death 
**  is  swallowed  up  in  victory.  Oh  death!  where  is  thy  sting?  O 
**  grave!  where  is  thy  victory  ?  The  sting  of  death  is  sin,  and 
"  the  strength  of  sin  is  the  law ;  but  thanks  be  to  God,  who 
"  giveth  us  the  victory  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."** 

•  John  3;  19. 

t  Matt.  22;  13. 

\  Jude  13. 

§  1  John,  2;  9. 

n  1  John/3;  8. 

*•!  Cor."  15}  25—37.  51— 5r. 


119 

<•  Thou  madest  him  to  have  dominion  over  the  works  of  thy 
**  hands  ;  thou  hast  put  ali  things  under  his/eet.''*  "  Thou 
"  liast  put  alt  things  in  subjection  under  his  feet.  For  in  that 
»*  he  put  all  in  subjection  under  him,  he  left  nothing  that  is 
"  not  put  under  him.  But  now  we  see  not  yet  all  things 
"  put  under  him.*' 

While  he  thus  wages  a  -war  of  extermination  against  sin 
of  which  he  is  not  the  author,  does  he  not  cease  to  contend 
with  the  souls  which  he  has  made  ?  Mr.  Winchester's  text 
on  the  universality  of  God's  creation,  postponed  from  my 
fifth  Universa]ist  argument  to  this  place,  says,  "  For  I  will 
"not contend  forever,  neither  will  I  be  always  wroth;  for 
*'  the  spirit  should  fail  before  me,  and  the  souls  which  I 
have  made.''t  To  this  he  might  have  added  Ps.  86:  9,  <*  All 
nations  whom  thou  hast  made  shall  come  and  worship  be- 
fore thee."  Although  he  will  not  contend  forever,  he  says;]: 
"  I  have  loved  thee  with  an  everlasting  love/'  As  there  is 
no  end  to  his  love,  so  "  of  the  increase  of  his  government 
and  peace  there  shall  be  no  end."§  "  In  his  days  shall  the 
"  righteous  flourish,  and  abundance  of  peace  as  long  as  the 
"moon  endureth.  He  shall  have  dominion  also  from  sea  to 
**  sea,  and  from  the  river  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth.  They 
**  that  dwell  in  the  wilderness  shall  bow  before  him,  and  his 
"enemies  shall  lick  the  dust."  "All  kings  shall  fall  be- 
"fore  him,  ali  nations  shall  serve  him."  "  He  shall  re- 
**  deem  their  soul  from  deceit  and  violence,  and  precious 
"shall  be  their  blood  in  his  sight."  "Men  shall  be  blessed 
"  in  him  :  all  nations  shall  call  him  blessed."^[ 

Are  not  the  unlimited  extent  and  the  happy  results  of  the 
Saviour's  dominion  plainly  revealed  in  Rom.  8:  19 — 24  ? 
**  For  the  earnest  expectation  of  the  creature  waiteth  for  the 
"  manifestation  of  the  sons  of  God.  For  the  creature  was 
"  made  subject  to  vanity,  not  willingly,  but  by  reason  of 
"  him  who  hath  subjected  the  same  in  hope,-  because  the 
"  creature  itself  also  shall  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of 
"  corruption  into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God. 
"  For  we  know  that  the  whole  creation  groaneth  and  tra- 
"  vaileth  in  pain  together  until  now.  And  not  only  they 
"  but  ourselves  also,  which  have  the  first  fruits  of  the  Spirit, 
"  even  we  ourselves,  groan  within  ourselves,  waiting  for 
"  the  adoption  to  wit,  tiie  redemption  of  our  body.  For  we 
''  are  saved  by  hope  :  but  hope  that  is  seen  is  not  hope  :  for 

♦  Pi.  8;  6. 

tisa.  57}16.        :fjer.  31;3.        4  ha.  9.7.        1  Ps.72;  7— 9.  11.  14. 17. 


120 

••  wliat  a  man  seeth,  wljy  doth  he  yet  liope  for  ?"  On  the 
same  subject,  is  it  not  sung  by  the  myriads  on  high,  ''And 
•'every  creature  which  is  in  Heaven,  and  on  the  earth,  and 
•»  such  as  are  in  the  sea.  and  ail  that  are  in  them,  heard  I 
"  saying,  blessing  and  honour,  and  glory  and  power,  be  un- 
''  to  him  that  sitteth  upon  the  throne,  and  unto  the  Lamb 
"  forever  and  ever.* 

In  Hebr.  1:  2.  he  is  declared  to  be  "  Heir  of  all  things.' 
"  I  shall  give  thee  the  heathen  for  thine  inheritance."!  He 
himself  declares  "  all  things  are  delivered  unto  me  of  my 
Father."  "The  Fatlier  loveth  the  Son,  and  hath  given  all 
•*  things  into  his  hands.*'  *'  Thou  hast  given  him  power 
*'  over  all  flesh,  that  he  should  give  eternal  life  to  as  many 
"  as  thou  hast  given  him.'*  '*  And  this  is  the  Father's  will 
"  which  hath  sent  me,  that  of  all  which  he  hath  given  me, 
"  I  should  lose  nothing,  but  should  raise  it  up  again  at  the 
«  last  day."+ 

According  to  the  tenor  of  this  universal  transfer  to  Christ, 
it  is  written,  *•  AH  the  ends  of  the  earth  shall  remember  and 
**  turn  unto  the  Lord,  and  all  the  kindreds  of  the  nations 
"shall  worship  before  thee.  For  the  kingdom  is  the  Lord's, 
"  and  he  is  the  Governor  among  the  nations.  All  they  that 
*'be  fat  upon  earth  shall  eat  and  worship  :  all  they  that 
"  go  down  to  the  dust  shall  bow  before  him,  and  none  can 
^*  keep  alive  his  own  soul."^  '•  And  there  was  given  him 
'*  dominion  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom,  that  all  people,  na- 
••  tions,  and  languages  should  serve  him:  his  dominion  is  an 
"  everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not  pass  away,  and  his 
"  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be  destroyed."****  Look  un- 
"  to  me  and  be  ye  saved,  all  the  ends  of  the  earth  ;  ff  for  I 
'•  am  God,  and  there  is  none  else.  I  have  sworn  by  myself, 
**  the  word  is  gone  out  of  my  mouth  in  righteousness,  and 
**  shall  not  return,  that  unto  me  every  knee  shsdl  bow,  every 
•'  tongue  shall  swear.  Surely  shall  one  say,  in  the  Lord  have 
"  I  righteousness  and  strength:  even  to  him  shall  men  come; 
"  and  all  that  are  incensed  against  him  shall  be  ashamed. 
"In  the  Lord  shall  all  the  seed  of  Israel  be  justified,  and 
"  shall  glory.":^  "  Wherefore  God  also  hath  highly  exalt- 
"  ed  him,  and  given  him  a  name  which  is  above  every  name: 

*Rer.  5;  13. 

t  Pa.  2;  8. 

i  Matt.  11;  27.    Luke  10;  22.    John  3;  35.    13;  3.     17;  2.    6:39. 

^Ps.  22;27— 2'.t. 

**  Dan.  7;  14. 

\\  Sec  Argument  2(1. 

t|lsa.  45;  22—25. 


121. 

*'  that  at  the  name  of  Jesus,  every  knee  nhould  bow,  of  things 
"in  heaven,  arnl  things  in  earth,  and  tilings  under  the  earth, 
"  And  thsit  even/  foiu/ue  should  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is 
•'Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father."*  "  For  the  Father 
**  \m\^etli  no  man,  hut  hath  committed  all  judgment  unto  the 
"  Son ;  that  a/l  men  siiouid  honour  the  Son,  even  as  tliey 
**  honour  the  Fathcr."f 

It  is  expressly  declared  that  "  God  sent  not  his  Son  into 
"the  world,  to  coudemnthe  world,  but  that  the  world  through 
"  Mm  might  be  saved."  "I  came  not  to  judge  the  world, 
"but  to  save  the  world."^"  "But  Israel  shall  be  saved  in 
"  the  Lord  with  an  everlasting  salvation :  ye  shall  not  be 
"  ashamed  nor  confounded  world  without  end."^  "  No  wea- 
"  pon  that  is  formed  against  thee  shall  prosper  j  and  every 
"tongue  that  shall  rise  against  thee  in  judgment  thou  shalt 
"  condemn.  Tliis  is  the  heritage  of  the  servants  of  the  Lord, 
"  and  their  righteousness  is  of  me,  saith  the  Lord."** 

Although  the  number  and  aggravation  of  their  offences 
may  increase  their  necessities,  can  they  hinder  the  mercy  of 
God?  "  They  tli  it  be  whole  need  not  a  physician,  but  they 
*'  that  are  sick.  But  go  ye  and  learn  what  that  meaneth,  I 
"  will  have  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice  :  for  I  am  not  come  to 
"  call  the  righteous,  but  sinners  to  repentance.*'tf  "  This  is 
"a  faithful  sayikig  and  worthy  of  all  acceptation,  that  Christ 
"  Jesus  came  into  the  wo'ld  to  save  sinners,  of  whom  I  am 
"  chief."  "  VViio  was  before  a  blasphemer,  and  a  persecuter, 
"and injurious;  but  I  obtained  mercy,  because  I  did  itigno- 
"  rantly  in  unbelief.'*k  "  Come  now,  and  let  us  reason  to- 
"  gether,  saith  the  Lord :  though  your  sins  be  as  scarlet,  they 
"  shall  be  as  white  as  snow ;  though  they  be  red  like  crimson, 
"  they  shall  be  as  wool." 

In  fact,  the  end  of  Christ's  coming,  and  of  the  preaching  of 
his  gospel  is  to  deliver  men  from  sin  and  sorrow.  "  And  thou 
"shalt  call  his  name  Jesus;  for  he  shall  save  his  people  from 
"their  sins.'*x  "For  the  law  of  the  spirit  of  life  in  Christ 
"  Jesus,  hath  made  me  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death."z 
"  The  Lord  hath  sent  me  to  preach  good  tidings  unto  the  meekj 
"  he  hath  sent  me  to  bind  up  the  broken  hearted,  to  proclaim 
*'  liberty  to  the  captives,  and  the  opening  of  the  prison  to  them 
"that  are  bound."q    "Stand  fast,  therefore,  in  the  liberty 

*  Phil.  2:  9—11.  +  John  5;  32,  23. 

t  John  3;  17. 12;  47.  H  Isa.  45;  17. 

♦•  Isa.  54;  17,  ft  Matt-  9.  12,  13. 
k  1  Tun.  1. 15,  13.  x  Matt.  1.  21. 

z  Rom.  8.  2.  q  Isa.  61.  1. 


122 

'*  w  herewith  Christ  hath  made  us  free,  juul  be  not  entangled 
"  again  with  the  yoke  of  bondage."* 

All  being  thus  relieved  from  sin,  they  are  from  misery  also. 
"And  in  this  mountain  sliall  the  Lord  of  Hosts  make  unto 
*'a(l  people  a  feast  of  fat  things,  a  feast  of  \\ines  on  the  lees,  of 
"  fat  things  full  of  marrow,  of  wines  on  tiie  lees  \Aell  refined. 
"And  he  will  destroy  in  this  mountain  the  face  of  the  r(n- 
**  erijig  cast  over  alt  people,  and  the  vail  that  is  spread  over 
*^  all  niitions.  He  will  swallow  up  death  in  victory;  and  the 
"Lord  God  will  wipe  away  tears  from  off  all  faces;  and  the 
"rebuke  of  his  people  shall  be  taken  away  from  ofl' all  the 
** earth;  for  the  Lord  hath  spoken  it."t  "And  God  shall 
"wipe  away  alt  tears  from  their  eyes;  and  there  shall  be  no 
"  more  death,  neither  sorrow  nor  ci-ying,  neitlier  shall  tlieir 
"he any  more  pain:  for  the  former  things  are  past  away."! 

To  the  foregoing  authorities  which  one  would  suppose  uni- 
versal enough,  we  add  the  following  ;  which,  as  well  as  those 
already  recited,  are  found  scattered  among  the  rubbish  of  my 
opponent  and  other  Universalist  authors,  some  in  one  and 
some  in  another,  but  in  none  of  them  brought  to  a  focus,  and 
presented  in  that  perfection  of  perversion  of  which  they  are 
susceptible. 

Our  Saviour,  in  prospect  of  his  crucifixion,  says  "  And  I,  if 
*'  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  eai'th,  will  draw  all  men  unto  me.^"^ 
The  Patriarch  Jacob  said,  "unto  him  shall  the  gathering  of 
"  the  people  be.*'**  "That  he  might  gather  together  in  one 
"  all  things  in  Chi'ist." J  f  "  W  ho  shall  change  our  vile  body, 
"  that  it  may  be  fashioned  like  unto  his  glorious  body,  accord- 
"  ing  to  the  working  whereby  he  is  able  even  to  subdue  ail 
"  things  unto  himself.":}::}:  "  For  itpleased  the  Father  that  in 
"liim  should  all  fulness  dwell.  And  (having  made  peace 
"  through  the  bhjod  of  his  cross.)  by  him  to  reconcile  all  Ihimjs 
"  to  himself;  by  him,  1  say,  whether  they  be  thinr/s  in  earih 
*U)r things  inheavm.'^^  "Thus  saith  the  Lord  God  ;  1  will 
"also  take  of  the  highest  branch  of  the  high  cedar,  and  will 
"  set  it ;  I  will  croji  oH'iVom  the  top  of  his  young  twigs  a  ten- 
"  derone,  and  will  plant  it  upon  an  high  mountain  and  emi- 
"  nent :  in  the  mountain  of  the  height  of  Israel  will  I  plant  it: 
"  and  it  shall  bring  foith  boughs,  and  be.ar  fruit,  and  be  a 
"  goodly  cedar;  and  under  it  shall  dwell  all  fowl  of  every  witifn 
"  in  the  shadow  of  the  branches  thereof  shail  they  dwell.   And 

•  Gal.  5.  I.  +  Isa.  25.  6—8. 

X  Wev.  ai.  4.     -  1  JoJin  12:  32. 

••Gen.  49.  10.  tt  Eph.  1.10. 

X\  Phil.  3.  21.  S  Coll.  1.  19,  20. 


123 

"  all  the  trees  of  the  field  shall  know  that  I  the  Lord  have 
"  brought  down  the  high  tree,  have  dried  up  the  green  tree, 
'*  and  liave  made  the  dry  tree  to  ttourish."*  "  He  that  des- 
"  Tended  is  the  same  also  that  ascended  up  far  above  all 
"  heavens,  that  iie  mighty///  all  thiii(fsJ'^\  *'  For  God  hath 
"concluded  tliem  all  in  unbelief,  that  he  might  have  merctf 
*'  upon  a//."|  •'  And  the  scriptui-e  foreseeing  that  God  would 
^'jitstifi/  the  heathen  thiough  faith,  preaciied  before  the  gos- 
"  pel  unto  Abraham,  saying,  in  thee  shall  all  nations  be  btes- 
*'  aed.'^  "  Now  to  Abraiiam  and  his  seed  were  the  promises 
"  made.  He  saith  not  and  to  seeds,  as  of  many  ;  but  as  of  one, 
*•  and  to  thy  seed,  which  is  Christ."§  "  And  I  will  bless 
*'  them  that  bh'ss  thee,  and  curse  him  that  curseth  thee  :  and 
'*  iii  thee  shall  aU families  of  the  earth  be  blessed.**  **  And  ia 
"  thy  seed  shall  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed,  because 
**  thou  hast  obeyed  njy  voice."** 

Thus  weft  see  that  Christ  came  to  destroy  the  works  of  the 
devil,  so  that  death  itself  shall  be  swallowed  up  in  victory. 
He  came  to  put  all  evil  under  his  feet.  He  caine  not  to  con- 
demn the  world  but  to  save  it;  not  to  call  the  righteous  but 
sinners,  even  the  chief  of  sinners.  He  came  to  put  an  end  to 
sins,  and  their  conseciuent  sorrows.  He  came  to  show  mercy 
to  all;  to  draw,  gather,  and  subdue  all;  to  change.];:}:  recon- 
cile, and  protect  all ;  to  fill,  justify  and  bless  all.  There 
shall  be  no  end  to  the  increase  of  his  government.  He  de- 
livers the  wAo/e  crea/io/i  from  corruption.  Every  creature 
in  heaven  and  in  the  earth,  and  under  the  earth,  all  tiie  ends 
of  the  earth,  all  kindreds  of  mankind,  all  fowls  of  every  wing, 
all  the  trees  of  the  field,  all  people,  nations,  languages,  and 
tongues  shall  confess  and  praise,  worship,  bow%  and  kneel  be- 
fore him,  and  honor  him  as  they  honour  the  Father.  He  will 
cease  to  contend  forever,  but  will  exercise  an  eierlasting  love ; 
so  that  men  shall  not  be  ashamed  nor  confounded  world  ivith^ 
out  end.  He  bestows  righteousness  and  strength,  glory  and 
salvation,  on  all  followers,  servants,  or  chil  Iren  wiiom  he 
claims,  and  whom  the  Father  has  given  him  ; But  the  Fa- 
ther has  given  him,  and  he  claims  for  his  followers,  all  men 

universally; Therefore   all    men   universally   shall    be 

saved. 

In  answer  to  the  argument  just  given,  it  may  be  observed 
that  the  major  proposition  of  the  syllogism  with  which  it 

*  Ez.  \7.  22—24.  t  Eph.  4.  7i\ 

I  Rom.  11.  32,  §  Gal.  3.  8,  15. 

♦♦  Gen   12.  3,  82.  18.  tf  The  Uiiiversallsts. 

%\  This  changing  relates  to  the  bodies  of  God's  yieopie. 


124 

closes,  is  so  entirely  acceptable  to  the  most  rigidly  Oi'thodox, 
that  it  has  the  appearance  of  being  manufactured  to  suit  their 
taste.  This  is  a  mistake.  My  opponent  often  declares  that 
Christ  came  not  to  save  men  in  their  sins,  but  from  their  sins ; 
they  must  therefore  be  followers,  servants  and  children:  and 
Mr.  Ballou  actually  quotes  at  large,*  the  passage  trom  Isaiah 
giAen  in  the  foregoing  argument,  in  w  hich  it  is  written, 
♦*  surely  shall  one  Siiy.  in  the  Lord  have  I  rigliteousness  and 
«  strength."  «*  In  the  Lord  shall  all  the  seed  of  Israel  be 
** justified  and  shall  glory." 

Equal  justice  is  done  to  them  in  the  statement  of  the  minor 
proposition,  about  which  we  diffrv.  In  order  for  them  to 
support  this,  and  thus  legitimate  the  conclusion,  it  will  not 
suffice  for  them  to  prove  that  Christ  is  King  of  nations  or 
the  King  of  the  universe ;  this  is  admitted:  but  they  must 
prove  that  all  men  univei\sally  are  his  willing  subjects,  his 
worthy  followers.  If,  instead  of  this,  it  should  be  found 
that  some  of  their  authorities  only  prove  Christ's  universal 
dominion  over  friends  and  foes,  saved  and  lost;  and  that 
others  prove  only  a  part  of  mankind,  such  as  those  who  have 
their  righteousness  and  strength  in  the  Lord,  to  be  given  to 
him  and  claimed  by  him  as  his  followers,  the  conclusion  falls. 

There  is  much  stress  laid  upon  Rom.  8:  19 — 24,  in  which 
the  w^ord  creature  or  creation]  (an  extensive  word)  is  used 
four  times.  It  is  said  that  this  whole  creation  was  involunta- 
rily subjected  to  vanity,  and  that  it "  groaneth  and  travaileth 
in  pain  together  until  now:"  but  that,  "  in  hope,"  it  "  waiteth 
for  the  manifestation  of  the  sons  of  God;"  and  "  shall  be  deli- 
vered from  the  bondage  of  coi'i'uption  into  the  glorious  liber- 
ty of  the  children  of  God."  It  is  here  declared  that  the  whole 
creation  sympathizes  with  man  in  the  corruption,  toil  and 
pain  consequent  upon  tlie  fall,  and  shall  participate  with  the 
children  of  God  in  their  glorious  emancipation.  As  the  whole 
human  race  fell  in  Adam,  and  as  the  Universalists  say  that 
the  whole  human  race  shall  be  children  of  God,  therefore  they 
say  that  the  whole  creation  here  means  the  whole  human 
race  universally,  and  exclusive  of  every  other  sort  of  creature. 
Their  system  depends  upon  this  unauthorized  interpretation. 
So  far  from  its  being  used  for  all  men  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
inferior  creation,  in  the  only  two  instances,  in  w  hich  it  oc- 
curs in  the  Scptuagint,]:  it  means  irrational  creatui-es  to  the 
exclusion  of  the  human  race.     That  the  Apostle  Paul  did  not 

♦  On  Atonement  p.  2U.  -furrj-.j 

t2Chr.  1*.  1$,    Eir.  8.  21. 


i  125 

intend  it  as  synoniinous  with  the  children  of  God  is  evident 
from  the  express  distinction  which  lie  makes  between  them 
and  the  whole  creation,  in  the  passage  under  consideration. 
After  telling  us  in  the  22d  verse,  that  the  whole  creation 
groaneth  and  travaileth,  he  says  in  the  2Sd,  "  and  not  only 
they,  hut  ourselves  also,  which  have  the  first  fruits  of  the 
Spirit,  even  we  ourselves  groan  within  ourselves."  That  he 
did  not  use  the  whole  creation  to  embrace  every  child  of 
Adam,  is  plain  from  Col.  1:  23;  where  he  declares  that  even 
in  his  day,  the  gospel  "  was  preached  in  the  whole  creation."§ 
In  this  })Iace,  and  in  Romans  8th,  it  appears  to  signify  the 
whole  earth :  that  earth  which,  according  to  Gen.  3:  17, 
participated  in  the  curse  pronounced  upon  fallen  man  ;  that 
earth,  which,  with  all  its  ii*rational  appendages  animate  and 
inanimate,  yet  groans  and  travails  in  pain  under  the  abuse 
which  men  have  made  of  it;  that  earth  which  is  destined  to  be 
delivered  from  this  abuse,  and  to  rejoice,  ^A  ith  its  hills  and  for- 
ests* herds  and  flocks,  in  the  liberty  of  the  children  of  God. 

Long  before  this  deliverance,  it  ig  said,  in  Rev.  5:  13,  that 
"  every  creature  which  is  in  Heaven,  and  on  the  earth,  and 
under  the  earth,  and  such  as  are  in  the  sea.  and  all  that  are 
in  them,  heard  I  saying,  blessing  and  honour  and  glory  and 
power,  be  unto  him  that  sitteth  upon  the  throne,  and  unto 
the  Lamb  forever  and  ever."  By  examining  the  context  it 
will  be  seen  that  this  took  place  before  the  opening  of  the 
Apocalyptic  seals;  that  is,  many  hundreds  of  years  ago.  It 
cannot,  therefore,  mean  that  every  descendant  of  Adam  thus 
praised  God,  because  many  were  not  yet  born.  Neither  can 
it  mean  that  all  then  living  praised  him  as  the  children  of 
God,  because  the  mass  of  mankind  were  then,  as  they  are 
yet,  enemies  to  God.  But  it  was  true  then,  that"  the  heavens 
declare  the  glory  of  G(»d,"t  and  it  is  yet  true  that  "  surely 
the  wrath  of  man  shall  praise  thee:  the  remainder  of  wrath 
shalt  thou  restrain." 

In  the  same  way  that  universal  homage  which  is  expressed 
in  many  of  the  above  texts,  is  explainec'  by  an  inspired  writer. 
Besides  other  passages  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  the 
Apostle  Paul  is  quoted  as  sayingj  "  that  in  the  name  of  Jesus, 
every  knee  should  bow,  of  tilings  in  heaven,  and  things  in 
earth,  and  things  under  the  earth,  and  that  every  tongue 
should  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God 
the  Father."  The  same  Apostle  has  clearly  shewn  that  such 
declarations  do  not  contain  the  doctrine  of  universal  salva- 

♦Isa.  55.  t2.  ^Phil.  2:  10, 11. 

fPi.  19,  1.  §  •*  """i  ■^1  »■•"'"• 


tiou,  but thatof'a  general  judgment,  after  which  he  assures 
us  tliatsonie  shall  be  punished  \sdth  everlasting  destruction. 
Tlie  passage  is  in  Rom.  14  :  10 — 12  "  But  v,hy  dost  thou 
♦*  judge  thy  bi'other  ?  or  m  hy  dost  thou  set  at  nought  thy  bro- 
"ther?  for  Ave  shall  all  stand  before  the  judgment  seat  of 
"  Christ.  For  it  is  written,  as  1  live  saith  the  Lord,  every 
**  knee  shall  bow  to  me,  and  every  tongue  shall  confess  to 
"  God.  So  then,  every  one  of  us  shall  give  account,  of  him- 
"  self  to  God."  It  would  be  strange  indeed,  for  the  Apostle 
to  jH'each  imivers.il  salvation  as  a  motive  to  deter  a  mortal 
from  judging  his  brother !  Instead  of  titis  he  reminds  him 
that  every  tongue  thus  judging,  must  confess  before  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  Christ,  and  every  stiH" knee  must  bow  there,  how- 
ever reluctantly.  And  let  it  be  remembered  that  the  Judge 
himself  has  already  informed  us  of  the  result  of  this  awful  ac- 
count. "  Then  shall  he  say  also,  unto  them  on  the  left  han<l, 
*'  depart  from  me,  ye  accursed  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared 
"  for  the  devil  and  his  angels."* 

It  has  already  been  shewn  in  the  refutation  of  the  7th  ar- 
gument, that  Chi'inVs  (fathering  all  things  related  to  this  same 
great  consummation.  In  the  contextf  it  was  shew^n  that  at 
that  period,  he  should  put  all  things,  that  is,  his  enemies,  un- 
der his  feet.  It  was  there  said,  that  the  scriptures  affirm  that 
this  treatment  is  given  to  enemies,  both  by  God  and  man. — 
When  Joshua  had  conquered  the  five  Kings  of  Canaan,  he  or- 
dered his  followers  to  bring  them  out  of  the  cave  in  which 
they  had  taken  refuge.  *' And  they  did  so,  and  brought  forth 
*'  those  five  Kings  unto  him,  out  of  the  cave,  the  King  of  Je- 
**  rusalem,  the  King  of  Hebron,  the  King  of  Jarmuth,  the 
"  King  of  Lachish,  and  the  King  of  Eglon.  And  it  came  to 
"  pass,  w  hen  they  bi'ought  out  those  Kings  unto  Joshua,  that 
«'  Joshua  called  for  all  the  men  of  Israel,  and  said  unto  the 
"  captains  of  the  men  of  war  which  went  with  him.  Come 
"  near,  put  your  feet  upon  the  necks  of  these  Kings.  And 
"  they  came  near  and  put  their  feet  upon  the  necks  of  them, 
"  And  Joshua  said  unto  them,  fear  not,  nor  be  dismayed,  be 
"  strong  and  of  good  courage :  for  thus  shall  the  Lord  do  to  all 
"your  enemies  against  Mhom  ye  fight.":f:  He  does  not  say  that 
God  will  put  put  his  feet  upon  their  sms,  but  upon  their  necks; 
and  that  not  as  children,  but  as  enemies.  How  utterly  pre- 
posterous, then,  to  say,  that  when  he  speaks  of  putting  all 
things  and  all  enemies  under  the  feet  of  Christ,  and  of  his 

•Matt.  25,  41. 
I  F,i)h.  1,  10.  22.  2.1.  t  Joshua  lOtli. 


127 

dcsfroyiiKj,  subduing,  and  suhjeitiiig  tlieni,  he  means  saving 
them !  ! 

Tliose  ])assa<;es  are  of  a  different  description,  wliich  repre- 
sent Christ  as  notconiing  to  condenin  the  world,  hut  to  save 
the  world  ;  not  contending  with  men  hut  shewing  mercy  to 
therji  ;  drawing,  reconciling,  sliadowing,  filling,  justifying, 
and  blessing  them.  And  here  it  may  not  he  amiss  to  notice 
a  very  few  of  the  apparent  itu^onsistencies  of  my  opponent 
and  other  Universalist  polemics.  Althou- h  they  dispute  the 
inspiration  of  the  Ajjocaiypse,  yet  if  Rev.  5:  13,  will  sup])]y 
n)Htter  for  declamation  or  sophistry  it  is  used  as  good  evi 
dence,  by  my  opponent,*  or  Mr.  Ballou.f  or  any  other.  Al- 
though they  profess  to  believe  parables  mere  falsehoods,  yet 
as  Ezck.  17:  22 — 4,  speaks  of  '*a//fowl  of  ererj/ wing," 
and  *•  rt// the  trees  of  the  field,"  coming  under  the  shadow 
of  the  *' goodly  cedar,"  this  must  be  true,  while  they  can 
see  nothing  but  mere  fiction  in  the  torment  of  the  rich  man 
and  otiiers  whose  hearts  are  as  a  cage  of  unclean  birds ;  or 
in  casting  out  of  the  garden  and  into  the  fire,  those  fruitless 
trees  which  cumber  the  ground  My  opp»)nent  denies  the 
Divinity  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  of  course  refuses  to  iionour 
him  as  he  pretends  to  honour  the  Father;  yet  to  serve  a 
turn,  he  blushes  not  to  quote  John  5:  28,  which  declares 
*•  that  all  men  should  honour  the  Son  even  as  they  honour 
the  Father."  Universalists  deny  t\vA{  everlasting  and/or- 
ever  denote  an  interminable  duration  :  yet  if  God  is  said 
not  to  contend  /breier  ;|  if  lie  is  said  to  exercise  an  everlast- 
ing love,^  to  bestow  an  everlasting  joy,5f  or  an  everlasting 
salvation,**  they  receive  the  words  in  their  unlimited  sense, 
without  thinking  any  criticism  necessary  to  prove  it.  So 
inconsistent  are  they,  that  for  the  sake  of  general  words 
and  phrases  which  may  easily  be  perverted  when  detached 
from  their  connection,  they  will  (|uote  passages  which  con- 
tain the  des])ised  but  essential  doctrine  of  justification  by 
faith,  and  even  the  destruction  of  the  wicked. 

In  that  class  of  texts  now  under  review,  these  general 
expressions  are  the  reliance  of  the  Universalists.  When 
4/hrist  is  represented  as  drawing  and  reconciling,  shadow- 
ing and  filling,  justifying,  blessing,  and  saving  every  crea- 
ture, all  men,  all  kindreds  and  nations,  languages  and 
tongues,  they  insist  upon  it,  without  one  particle  of  proof, 

•Minutes,  p.  124.  t  On  Atonement,  p.  209. 

^Isa.  57;  16.  ^  Jer,  31,  ,1. 

Ilsa.  36. 10.  **I3.  45;17. 


128 

that  all  and  every  must  be  understood  universally,  and  as 
embracing  each  individual  of  the  human  race,  from  the  crea- 
tion of  Adam  to  the  consummation  of  all  things.  When  the 
absurdity  of  this  interpretation  is  shewn  by  a  concise  ap- 
peal to  general  usage,  and  to  the  terms  and  connexion  of  the 
authorities  containing  these  expressions,  this  9th  argument 
shall  be  considered  as  answered. 

Although  a  certain  acquaintance  cf  the  Apostle  John  was 
known  to  but  fewof  the  human  race,  and  hated  and  slander- 
ed by  many  of  those  who  knew  him,  John  sa^s,*  ♦•  Demet- 
rious  hath  good  report  of  all  men."     The  Apostles  knew 
comparatively  few,  and  of  them  a  goodly  little  number  loved 
them.     Yet  our  Saviour  says  to  themf"  Ye  shall  be  hated 
of  all  men,""  ye  shall  be  hated  of  a//  nations  for  my  name's 
sake."  Itis  required  J  that  "supplications,  prayers,  interces- 
sions and  giving  of  thanks  be  made  for  «//men."  Yet  it  is  said,§ 
"  There  is  a  sin  unto  death ;  I  do  not  say  that  he  shall  pray 
for  it."     The  Universalist  explanation  of  Paul's  aphorism, 
**  all  things  are  lawful,*'  would  legalize  even  the  sin  against 
the  Holy  Ghost.     In  the  universal  sense,  it  is  neither  right 
nor  possible  for  any  one,  wise  or  simple  to  believe  o// things 
or  every  word.     Yet  Paul  tells  us^]  that  '•  charity  believeth 
all  things,'*  and  Solomon  says**   '*  The  simple  believeth 
every  word.'*     It  is  neither  right  nor  possible  for  any  one 
to  please  every  child  of  Adam  universally  in  any  thing:  yet 
Paul  saysft   **  I  please  all  men  in  all  things."     God  told 
Paul:|::{:  that  he  should  be  Christ's  "  witness  unto  all  men." 
Paul  called  the  Corinthians"  his  epistle  "known  and  read  of  all 
men."  When  he  said§§  that  he  preached  Christ, ''warning  cr?- 
ry  man,  and  teaching  every  man  in  all  wisdom,"  did  he  mean 
that  he  was  infinitely  wise,  and  that  he  imparted  this  wis- 
dom to  every  individual  of  the  human  family  ?  Did  our  Sa- 
viour make  this  the  duty  of  any  of  the  Apostles,  when  he 
sent  them  to  "  teach  all  nations,"  and  to  "  preach  the  gos- 
pel to  every  creature  ?''^^  What  did  he  mean,  when  he  said 
"  this  gospel  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  preached  in  all  this 
world,  for  a  witness  unto  all  nations.'"  or  what  did  Paul 
mean,  when  he  told  the  Collosians"*^  that,  in   his  day,  the 
gospel  **  was  preached  to  every  creature  which  is  under  hea- 
ven," and  "  in  all  the  world  ?" 

*3  John  12.  tMatt.lO;22.    24;  9.? 

%  1  Tim.  2;  1.  ^1  John  5;  16. 

1 1  Cor   13:  7.  *  •  Prov.  14;  15. 

+t  1  Cor.  10:  S3.  iH   Acts  22;  15. 

§  Col.  1:21.  11  Matt.  28;  19.    Mk.  I6f  15. 

1;  23. 6.  a  2  Cor.  3;  2. 


129 

It  was  told  to  Christ,  '*  all  men  seek  for  tliee."a  The 
Scriptiircl  says  that  many  foHowedour  Saviour  "  out  of  all 
cities;'' that  he  "' h)oke(l  round  about  uj)on  uU  things,"k 
**  healing  <irery  sickness,  and  every  disease  among  the  peo- 
plei'o  thatt'vcn  in  the  Apostolic  day,  "he  maketh  nianifost 
tiie  sa\»)ur  of  his  knowledge  by  us  in  eveiy  place;"''  that  he 
was  '*  glorified  of  a//;"ii  and  that  in  the  first  century'  all 
men  glorified  God.''n 

Paul  says*  that  God,  "in  times  past,  suffered  all  nations 
"to  walk  in  their  own  ways:"  did  he  suffer  all  individuals 
so  to  walk?  John  says.f  that  a  certain  beast  "causeth  a//, 
"  both  small  and  great,  rich  and  poor,  free  and  bond,  to 
"receive  a  mark  in  their  right  hand,  or  in  their  foreheads." 
Was  this  intended  to  be  undei-stood  universally  of  all  ages, 
or  even  of  any  i)articular  age?  God  says,  concerning  Mys- 
tical Babylon  "  by  thy  sorceries  \\qvq  all  nations  deceived  ;" 
that "  all  nations  have  drunk  of  the  wine  of  the  wi'ath  of  her 
*'  fttrnication  ;"  '•  siie  made  all  nations  drink  of  the  wine  of 
"the  wrath  of  her  fornication."'!  He  says  that  power  was 
given  to  the  Beast "  to  make  war  with  the  saints  and  to  over- 
"  come  them :  and  power  was  given  him  over  all  kindreds  and 
"  tongues  and  nations."  "  And  the  kings  of  the  earth,  and 
"  the  gi'eat  men,  and  the  rich  men,  and  the  chief  cap- 
"  tains,  and  the  mighty  men,  and  every  bond  man,  and  every 
"  free  man,  hid  tliemselves  in  the  dens  and  in  the  rocks  of 
"  the  mountains."||  Concerning  our  Saviour's  second  com- 
ing, he  says,  "And  then  shall  «// the  tribes  of  tlic  earth 
"  mourn."q  "  Behold  he  cometh  with  clouds;  sin(\  every  eye 
"shall  see  him,  and  they  also  which  pierced  him  :  and  all 
kindreds  of  the  earth  shall  wail  because  of  him."^  Here 
also,  as  well  as  in  the  prophet  Ezekiel,  we  have  some  men- 
tion of  what  my  opponents  would,  in  this  case,  call  parabo- 
lical fowls.  "  And  I  saw  an  angel  standing  in  the  sun ;  and 
"he  cried  with  a  loud  voice,  saying  to  all  the  fowls  that  fly  in 
"the  midst  of  heaven,  come  and  gather  yourselves  together 
"  unto  the  supper  of  the  Great  God;  that  ye  may  cat  the  flesh 
"  of  kings,  and  the  flesh  of  captains,  and  the  flesh  of  mighty 


aMk  1;  37, 

1  Mk.  6.  33. 

k  .Mk.  11.  11. 

g  Matt.  9.  35. 

b  2  Coi'.  2-  U. 

hLuke  4.  15. 

n  Acts  4.  21. 

*  Acts  14.  16. 

t  Rev.  13.  16. 

d  Rev.  18.  23,  3, 

,  14.  8. 

H  Rev.  13;  7. 6. 

15. 

q    Matt.  24;  30. 

R 

%  Rev.  1. 


130 

"men,  ami  the  flcsli  of  horses,  anil  ol"  them  that  sit  on  them, 
'♦  and  the  flesli  oi' al.  men,  hoth  free  ami  bond,  hoth  small  and 
*'  great."x  Well  migiit  Peter  say,  **  the  end  oiall  things  is  at 
•♦  hand.''z 

Suppose  for  a  moment  that  the  word  a/l  or  every  must  be 
interpreted  in  an  uiu\ersal  sense.  Then  the  above  texts 
would  prove  that  the  Apostles  pleased  all  men,  and  yet  were 
hated  of  all;  that  they  believed  all  things,  and  thought  all 
things  lawful,  jind  yet  preaclied  to  alt  men  universally,  that 
gospel  which  rejects  everu  thing  inconsistent  with  truth  and 
righteousness.  They  prove  that  otir  Saviour,  while  on  earth, 
was  sought  by  a// men  universally,  from  a// cities  universally, 
and  that,  with  his  hodily  eyes,  he  looked  around  upon  a//  the 
human  race  of  every  age  of  the  world,  cured  a// their  disea- 
ses universally,  and  diffused  among  them  all  universally  *'  the 
"savour  of  his  knowledge,"  so  that  all  univerpally,  wheth- 
er in  heaven,  earth  or  hell,  dead,  living,  or  yet  unborn,  did, 
at  that  time,  give  glory  to  Clirist  and  to  God.  Notwith- 
standi)ig  this,  the  above  passages  prove,  according  to  this 
Universalist  mode  of  interpretation,  that  ali  men  universal- 
ly walk  in  their  own  ways;  thatthey  receive  the  mark  of  the 
Beast;  thatthey  are  deceived  and  made  drunk  by  him,  and 
brouglit  under  his  power ;  tliat  all  men  universally  shall  hide 
"  themselves  in  the  dens  and  in  the  rocks  of  the  mountains;" 
that  all  universally  shall  mouin  and  wail  and  finally  be 
eaten  up  by  "a//  the  fowls  that  fly  in  the  midst  of  heaven:" 
and  after  Paul's  man  who  "believeth  that  he  may  eat  all 
thingSf"q  univei'sally,  has  eaten  ail  these  fowls  universally* 
then  nothing  will  remain  but  to  annihilate  hirn^  and  Peter^s 
"end  oi  all  fhinfjs'*  universally  sliall  Jiave  come  to  pass. 

Universal ists  themselves  see  that  in  each  of  the  above  pas- 
sages, and  very  ma)»y  others  which  might  be  mentioned, 
these  general  expressions  ai'e  used  in  a  limited  signification. 
So  it  is  with  the  same  exjH'essions  in  that  class  of  texts  now 
under  considei'ation.  This  will  appear  in  tlie  case  of  Gen. 
12:  3,  by  sim])ly  quoting  the  whole  verse,  "And  I  will 
"  bless  them  that  bless  thee,  and  curse  him  that curscth thee: 
"and  in  thee  shall  all  families  of  the  eartli  be  blessed."  Now 
it  is  very  well  known  that  Balak  the  son  of  Zipimrg  is  only 
one  of  many  millions  who  curse  the  people  of  God.  There- 
fore Balak  and  many  others  shall  be  cursed  of  God,  and  must 

X  Rev.  19.  17, 18.  z  1  Pet.  4.  ~. 

q  Komi  14.  2. 
g  Num.  22.  6. 


131 

be  exceptions  to  tlic  gencrsil  promise  given  in  tlie  same  verse, 
that  all  the  families  oi  the  earth  shall  he  hiessed  in  Cluistw 
Although  in  Ez.  17  :  23,  God  promises  that  the  goodly  Ce- 
dar shall  protect  "a//  fowl  of  every  wing;"  yet  in  the  next 
verse  he  promises  that  all  the  ti*ees  of  tlie  field  shall  know 
that  he  has  "hrought  down  the  high  tree"  and  "dried  up  the 
green  tree,"  as  well  as  "exalted  the  low  tree"  and  "made 
"  the  dry  tree  to  flourish."  These  that  are  brought  down  and 
dried  up,  must  therefore  he  exceptions  to  the  geneial  pro- 
mise made  in  the  preceding  \  erse. 

When  Christ  is  said  to  "  fill  al!  things,"  it  means  that  he 
will  fill  the  church  of  believers  with  (dl  necessary  gospel 
officers  and  oi-dinanccs.  He  is  "  the  Head  over  all  things 
*'  to  the  chujcli,  which  is  his  body,  the  fulness  of  him  that 
filleth  all  in  all."«  When  in  Eph.  4 :  10,  we  are  told  that 
he  fills  all  things  the  Apostle  adds  immediately,  "  and  he 
gave  some,  Apostles;  and  some,  prophets,  and  some,  evan- 
gelists ;  and  some,  pastors  and  teachers  ;  for  the  perfecting 
of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the  minist>  y,  for  the  edifying 
oft-.-  body  of  Christ:  till  we  aliu  couie  in  the  unity  of  the 
faith,  [an.'l  not  in  unbelief,]  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son 
of  Go.:,unto  a  perfect  man,  unto  the  measure  of  the  stature  of 
the  fulness  of  Christ,"  Is  tiiere  not  a  great  difference  be- 
tween sa}  ing  that  Christ  fills  his  church  with  all  necessary 
ecclesiastical  and  spiiitual  supplies,  for  their  edification  in 
saviiig  faith  anJ  know  ledge,  on  the  one  hand ;  and  saying  on 
the  other  hand,  as  the  Univcrsalists  pretend,  that  he  fills 
with  salvation  hereafter  all  those  who  live  and  die  without 
this  know  ledge  and  faith  ? 

In  Col.  1:  23,  the  Apostle  informs  us  that  if  those  to  whom 
he  wrote  belonged  to  the  all  things  which  God  reconciled  to 
himself  by  Christ  Jesus,  as  in  verses  19,  20,  then  they  would 
prove  it  by  their  faith  and  perseverance  :  "  If  ye  continue  in 
"the  faith,  grounded  and  settled,  and  be  not  moved  away 
*'  from  the  hope  of  the  gospel,  which  ye  have  heard,  and 
"  which  w  as  preached  to  every  creature  w  hich  is  under 
"  heaven."  The  w  riter  did  not  mean  here  that  every  crea- 
ture universally  had  heard  or  believed  the  gospel:  neither 
did  he  mean  that  all  men  universally  were  reconciled  to  God, 
but  those  only  w  ho  continued  in  the  faith,  rooted  and  ground- 
ed. In  Rom.  11:  15,  the  same  Apostle  is  so  far  fi*om  atti'i- 
buting  universality  to  this  reconciliation,  that  he  informs  us 
that  the  reconciliation  of  the  Gentile  world  was  effected  by 

a  Eph.  1.  22,  23.  b  That  \i,  the  body  of  Christ. 


132 

the  casting  away  of  the  Jews.  "For  if  the  castin<f  away  of 
"  them  he  the  reconcUiiuf  of  the  world,  what  sliaU  the  re- 
*'  ceiviiig  of  them  be  but  life  from  the  dead?''  As  m  this  pas- 
sage, the  world,  a  general  word,  is  used  to  distinguish  the 
Gentiles  from  the  Jews,  so  in  the  32nd  verse,  the  word  all  is 
used  to  embrace  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  generally,  though 
not  universally.  "  For  God  hath  concluded  tliem  all  in 
*'  unbelief,  that  he  might  itave  mercy  upon  all.''  This  ap- 
pears from  the  fact  that  throughout  the  cluipter,  and  particu- 
larly in  the  two  preceding  verses,  faith  and  mercy,  unbelief 
and  rejection  are  used  as  interchangeable  teinis ;  from  which 
we  are  left  to  understand,  that  GotUvill  ••  have  meicy  upon 
all"  believers,  whether  Jews  or  Gentiles,  and  cast  away  all 
unbelievers,  whether  they  be  bi'anches  of  the  olive-tree  or  the 
wild  olive-tree.  Certain  it  is  that  the  Apostle  James?>  did 
not  think  that  God  would  "  have  mercy  upon  all"  indiscrim- 
inately, but  only  upon  those  who  shew  mercy  to  othei's. 
"For  he  shall  haAC  judgment  without  mercy,  that  hath 
"shewed  no  mercy."  And  notwithstanding  the  doidits  of 
some,  these  Apostles,  Paul  and  James,  spoke  the  same  thing, 
and  by  the  same  Spirit,  both  on  justificatioji  and  condem- 
nation, 

But  Mr.  Ballon  c  seems  to  think  that  he  can  admit  this 
much,  and  yet  prove  universal  salvation,  by  shewing  that  all 
uniA^ersally  shall  be  blessed  with  faith.  For  this  purpose, 
after  quoting  the  promise  that  in  Christ  "  shall  all  the  na- 
tio)is  of  the  earth  be  blessed,"  he  iniorms  us  unequivocally 
that  this  blessing  is  justijication  ihrouqh  faith,  and  refers  to 
Gal.  3;  8,  foi-  his  proof.  "  And  the  Scripture  foreseeing  that 
"  God  would  justify  the  heathen  through  faith,  preached  be- 
"  fore  the  Gospel  unto  Abraham,  saying,  in  thee  shall  all 
"nations  be  blessed."  But  suj)pose  that  he  does  justify  all 
the  lieathen  through  faith  ;  is  this  saying  that  he  will  justify 
all  men  universally  through  faith  ?  What  will  he  do  with 
the  .Jewish  branches  of  the  olive  tree,  concerning  which  the 
same  Apostle  says  d  *"  because  of  unbelief,  they  were  broken 
off?"  And  it  is  a  matter  of  historical  evidence  that  millions 
of  them  have  died  in  this  unbelief.  But  observe  that  the 
promise  that  God  *•  itow/i/ justify  the  heathen  through  faith," 
ne\er  m as  intended  to  take  effect  to  any  great  extent,  until 
the  Christian  dispensation  j  before  which  time,  millions  of 
the  Gentiles  had  died  in  unbelief.     Mr.  Ballon,  instead  of 


b  2;  13.  c  On  Atonement,  p.  195. 

d  Rom.  11.20. 


133 

dainiing  for  liimsclf  and  the  rest  of  the  heathen,  the  honor 
of  benig  Abraliiuii's  seed,  and  heirs  according  to  the  promise, 
ougiit  to  reincmber  that  our  Saviour  said  to  such  vain  pre- 
tenders ;  "  If  ye  were  Abraham's  chihiren,  ye  would  do  the 
v\ orks  of  Abrahiim.''e  That  many  perform  not  the  uorks  of 
Abraham  in  ikis  life  is  too  plain  from  Scj'ipture  and  daily 
observation;  and  it  is  declared  upon  infallil)le  authoi'ity, 
that  **  there  is  no  work,  nor  device,  nor  knowledge,  nor  wis- 
dom, in  the  grave  whither  thou  goest."  If  thereit)re,  salva- 
tion depends  upo)i  Abraham's  faitli  and  work,  and  if  there 
are  some  wlio  neither  believe  nor  work  here  nor  hereafter, 
there  are  some  who  are  lost  in  this  world  and  theworld  to  come. 
When  my  opponent  reminds  us  that  our  Saviour  canxe  not  to 
condemn  the  w  orld,  hut  to  save  the  w orld,  it  would  be  well 
to  recollect  also  that  he  has  said,  and  has  commanded  his  ser- 
vants to  say,  "he  that  believeth  and  is  baptised  shall  be  saved, 
but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned."/ 

In  those  very  passages  which  speak  in  direct  terms,  of  the 
Father  giving  ail  things  to  the  Son,  the  context  proves  that 
all  men  were  not  given  to  him  as  his  follow  ers,  neither  does 
he  claim  them  as  such.  In  Luke  10:  22,  he  says  "  all  things 
are  delivered  to  me  of  my  Fatiier."  But  no  farther  back 
than  the  preceding  verse,  he  had  thankedthat  Father,  that  in 
his  sovereignty,  he  liad  hidden  tlie  things  connected  with 
salvation,  from  the  w  ise  and  prudent,  and  revealed  them  un- 
to babes:^  In  John  3:  35,  he  says,  "the  Father  loveth  the 
Son,  and  hath  given  all  tilings  into  his  hand."  But  no 
farther  on  than  the  next  verse  he  says,  "  He  that  believeth  on 
"  the  Son  hath  everlasting  life :  and  he  that  believeth  not 
"  the  Son  shall  not  see  life  ;  but  the  WTath  of  God  abideth 
"  on  him."  In  John  17:  2,  he  says,  "  Thou  hast  given  him 
"  pow  er  over  all  flesh  that  he  should  give  eternal  life  to  as 
"  many  as  thou  hast  given  i»ini."  Yet  in  the  next  verse  he 
tells  us  that  this  eternal  life  is  connected  with  that  saving 
know  ledge,  for  the  lack  of  which  an  inspired  prophet  h  tells 
us  that  many  are  destroyed.  In  verses  6 — 9,  we  are  ex- 
pressly taught  that  tliis  knowledge  is  manifested  not  to  the 
tvorld  universally,  but  to  those  whom  the  Fatlier  liad  given  him 
out  of  the  world ;  and  by  them  it  was  believingly  received. 

To  prove  that  Christ  does  not  lose  one  of  the  human  race 
which  they  say  is  universally  given  to  him,  they  quote  John 
6:  39j  "And  this  is  the  Father's  will  which  hath  sent  me, 

e  John  8.  39,  f  Mk.  16. 16. 

g  See  also  ?Iatt.  11 ;  25.  27.  h  Hosea.  4:  6. 


134 

"  that  of  all  which  he  hath  given  me,  I  should  lose  nothing, 
"  but  should  raise  it  up  again  at  tlie  last  day."  But  the 
very  next  verse  proves  that  none  but  be[ie>  ers  are  raised  to 
everlasting  life.  "  And  this  is  the  will  of  him  that  sent 
"  me,  that  every  one  which  seeth  the  Son,  and  be- 
**  iieveth  on  him,  may  have  everlasting  life  :  and  I  will  raise 
'*him  up  at  the  last  day."  To  sliew  that  all  men  were  not 
possessed  of  this  faith,  through  which  some  receive  eternal 
life,  our  Saviour  says,  in  tiie  64th  verse,  "But  there  are 
**  some  of  you  that  believe  not.  For  Jesus  knew  from  the 
*•  beginning,  who  they  were  that  believed  not,  and  who  should 
"  betray  him."  Tlie  Universalist  position  which  we  are 
now  discussing,  says  that  "  the  Father  has  given  him,  and 
he  claims  for  his  followers,  all  men  universally."  But 
the  66th  verse  of  this  same  6th  chapter  of  John,  says, 
"  From  that  time  many  of  his  disciples  went  back,  and  walk- 
ed no  more  with  him."  Here  then  are  some  who,  after  hav- 
ing been  his  professed  followers^  became  offended  at  his 
heavenly  doctrine;  followed  him  no  longer ;  and  thus  fell  short 
of  that  eternal  life  which  is  connected  witli  faith. 

The  only  remaining  authority  under  this  head  is  John  13: 
S,  in  which  Jesus  is  represented  as  "  knowing  that  the  Fa- 
ther had  given  all  things  into  his  hands."  But  to  his  own 
family  he  says  in  the  10th  verse,  "  ye  are  clean  but  not  all." 
Now  withont  holiness  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord.  In  John 
6:  64,  just  now  quoted,  it  is  intimated  that  Judas  the  traitor 
was  one  of  those  who  "believed  not:"  he  therefore  was  this 
unclean  person.  In  the  verse  immediately  preceding  the 
authority  now  in  hand,  and  in  a  subsequent  verse  of  the 
same  chapter, *it  is  said  that  the  devil  put  it "  into  the  heart 
of  Judas  Iscariot,  Simon's  son,  to  betray"  Christ;  and 
that  for  this  purpose,  "  Satan  entered  into  him."  As 
one  cannot  serve  two  masters,  and  Judas  had  undertaken 
the  service  of  Satan,  and  was  therefore  an  unclean  unbeliever, 
he  was  notsi  follower  of  Christ.  But  in  the  35th  verse,  our 
Saviour  announces  a  rule  which  evidently  leaves  many  others 
in  the  same  disgrace.  "  By  this  shall  all  men  know  that  ye 
are  my  disciples,  if  ye  love  one  another." 

Let  it  be  remembered  that  the  argument  under  discussion 

is  as  follows; Christ  saves  all  his  followers  whom  the 

Father  has  given  him; Butthe  Fatlier  has  given  him  all 

men  universally  as  his  followers; Therefore  all  men  uni- 
versally shall  be  saved.    After  an  examination  of  the  au- 

•John  13:  2.27. 


135 

Uiorities  advanced  in  support  of  the  minor  proposition  of  this 
syHogism.  it  apjjeai's  from  the  context  and  the  whole  tenor 
of  God's  word,  tliat  the  Father  has  not  given  to  Christ  a*  his 
followers^  all  men  universally,  but  only  those  who  repent,  and 
believe,  obey  and  love.  The  argument  therefore  falls  to  the 
ground. 

TENTH  UNIVERSALIST  ARGUMENT. 

Christ- s  Priestly  Office.  Do  not  the  scriptures  give  us 
frequent  assurances  that  the  High  Priest  of  our  profession 
atones  and  intercedes  for  all  men?  In  1  Tim.  2:  1,  he  re- 
quires us  to  pray  for  alt  men:  Will  he  then  pray  for  a  part 
only  ?  No  wonder  that  he  would  exercise  this  function  of 
his  priestly  office  in  behalf  of  all,  when  he  gave  his  life  for  all. 
In  1  Cor.  15:  S,  it  is  said  that "  Christ  died  for  our  sins  ac- 
cording to  the  sci'iptures."  Now  when  we  refer  to  these 
scriptures  as  in  Dan.  9  :  24,  do  we  not  find  that  instead  of 
some  remaining  under  their  sins  forever,  the  atonement  makes 
an  end  of  all  sins  ?  '•  Seventy  weeks  are  determined  upon 
"  thy  people  and  upon  thy  holy  city,  to  finish  the  transgres- 
"sion,  andto  make  an  end  of  sins,  and  to  make  reconciliation 
**  for  iniquity,  and  to  bring  in  everlasting  righteousness,  and 
"  to  seal  up  the  vision  and  prophecy,  and  to  anoint  the  most 
**  Holy."  "  Thou  shaft  call  his  name  Jesus,  for  he  shall  save 
"  his  people  from  their  sins."*  "  He  shall  redeem  theirsouls 
"  from  deceit  and  violence  :"t  That  is,  from  sin  and  punish- 
ment. "  But  he  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions,  he  was 
*'  bruised  for  our  iniquities :  the  chastisement  of  our  peace 
"  was  upon  him,  and  w  ith  his  stripes  we  are  healed.  A II 
"we  like  sheep  have  gone  astray;  we  have  turned  every  one 
"  to  his  own  way ;  and  the  Lord  hath  laid  on  him  the  ini- 
"  quity  of  us  all.  He  shall  see  of  the  travail  of  his  soul  and 
"  shall  be  satisfied :  by  his  knowledge  shall  my  righteous  ser- 
"vant  justify  many,  for  he  shall  bear  their  iniquities."]; 
"For  when  we  were  yet  without  strength,  in  due  time  Christ 
"  died  for  the  ungodly.''''^  "  For  Christ  also  hath  once  suf- 
«ered  for  .sins,  the  just  for  the  unjust,  that  he  might  bring 
«  us  to  God."^  "  Who  died  for  us  that  whether  we  wake  or 
«  sleep,  we  should  live  togetlier  with  him."a  "  God  is  no 
**  respecter  of  persons."^  *'  For  therefore  we  both  labour  and 
«  suffer  reproach  because  we  trust  in  the  living  God,  who  is 
« the  Saviour  of  all  men ;  especially  of  those  that  believe."c 

•  Matt.  1:  21.  fPs-  72:  14,  |;Isa.  58  :  5,  6.  11. 

^  Rom.  5:  6.  11  Pet.  3;  18.        a.  1  Theas.  Sj  10. 

b  Acts.  10  J  34.  c  ITvai.  4;  10. 


136 

»'  For  the  love  of  Chiist  consti'aineth  us ;  because  we  thus 
*\\\\i]g('.  that  it' o/te  died  for  all,  then  were  all  dead  :  and  tliat 
'*  he  died  for  all,  tliat  thev  which  live  should  not  henceiorth 
*•  live  unto  themselves,  but  unto  him  which  died  for  them  and 
<'  rose  again."*  "  The  Father  sent  the  Son  to  be  the  Sa- 
*'viour  of  the  ivorld.^'f  '*  For  God  so  loved  </te  tt7oW</  that 
*'  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  belicveth  in 
"  him  should  not  perish  but  have  everlasting  life.  For  (Jod 
**sent  not  his  Soji  into  the  world  to  condemn  the  ivor/d,  hut 
"  that  the  luorld  through  him  might  be  saved.":|:  "  Behold 
"  the  Lamb  of  God  which  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the  ivorkW^ 
*'  And  he  is  the  propitiation  foi*  our  sins :  and  not  foi*  ours 
"only,  but  also  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  wor/d.^''^  "  For  the 
'*  grace  of  God  tliat  bringeth  salvation  hatli  appeared  unto 
"a//  men.^''^  *'  But  we  see  Jesus  who  was  made  a  little  low- 
*'  er  than  the  angels  for  the  suffering  of  death,  crowned  with 
'*  glory  and  honor,  that  he  by  tlie  grace  of  God,  should  taste 
*'  death  for  every  man.''^  •  Wlio  gave  himself  a  ransom  for 
** all,  to  be  testified  in  due  time."<=  He  "delivered  him  up 
"  for  us  «//."'!  "  For  as  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ 
"  shall  all  be  made  alive."*  *'  But  not  as  the  offence,  so  also 
"  is  the  free  gift.  For  if  thi'ough  the  offence  of  one  many 
'*  be  dead,  much  more  the  grace  of  God,  and  the  gift  by 
**  grace,  which  is  by  one  man,  Jesus  Christ,  hath  aboun- 
*♦  ded  unto  many.  And  not  as  it  was  by  one  that  sinned,  so 
"is  the  gift;  for  the  judgment  was  by  one  to  condemnation, 
**  but  the  free  gift  is  of  many  offences  unto  justification. 
**  For  if  by  one  man's  offence  death  reigned  by  one,  much 
"more  they  which  receive  abundance  of  grace  and  of  the 
•'  gift  of  righteousness,  shall  reign  in  life  by  one.  Jesus 
'•Christ.  Therefore  as  by  the  offence  of  one,  judgment 
"  came  upon  all  mer)  to  condemnation,  even  so  by  the  righ- 
"teousness  of  one,  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men  unto  jus- 
*'  tification  of  life.  For  as  by  one  man's  disobedience  many 
*'  were  made  sinners,  so  by  the  obedience  of  one  shall  many 
"  be  made  righteous. — Moreover  the  law  entered  that  the 
"  offence  might  abound  :  but  where  sin  abounded  grace  did 
<•  much  more  abound  ;  that  as  sin  hath  reigned  unto  death, 
"  even  so  migbt  grace  reign  through  righteousness,  untw 
'•  eternal  life  by  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord."i 

♦  2  Cor.  5;  14,  15.  t  1  John  4;  14.  ^  John  3;  16,  17. 

%  John  1:  29.  1  I  .John  2;  2.  a  Tit.  2;  11. 

bHeb.  2;' 9.       --  c  I    lim.  2;  G.  d  Kom,  8.  32. 

e  1  Cor.  15;  22.  f  Rom.  5;  15—21. 


137 

Do  not  these  passages  prove  that  Christ,  in  his  A.tone- 
ment,  takes  away  our  sins  and  makes  an  end  of  them  ?  that 
he  redeems  the  soul  from  deceit  and  violence,  so  as  to  giveus 
peace  for  his  chastisement,  and  healins:  by  his  stripes?  Is 
it  not  declared  tliat  through  his  condemnation  and  death,  he 
procures  for  us,  justification  and  eternal  life?  And  is  it  not 
affirmed  by  great  strength  and  variety  of  expression,  that 
he  is  a  ransom  for  all,  the  Saviour  of  evertj  man,  of  the 
loorld,  aud  of  the  lohole  ivorldi  And  as  he  spared  not  his  life 
can  he  withhold  his  intercessory  prayers  ?  especially  as  he 
commands  us  to  pray  for  all  ?  May  we  not  therefore  reason 
that — Christ  saves  all  for  whom  he  dies; — He  dies  for  all 
men  universally  ', — Therefore  all  men  universally  shall  be 
saved  ? 

On  this  subject  Mr.  Ballon  i^easons  as  follows,  viz.  "  God 
"  would  not  have  given  his  Son  a  ransom  for  all,  if  it  were 
"  not  his  iw7/that  a// should  be  saved  ;  and  if  it  be  God's  will, 
**  it  ought  to  be  ours,  therefore  it  is  right  to  piay  for  all.  If 
"  the  ransom  were  paid  for  all,  it  argues,  that  it  w  as  the  in- 
"  tention  of  the  Ransonier,  that  all  should  be  benefited.  What 
"  would  have  been  the  astonisiiment  of  tlie  world  after  the 
^'  immortal  Washington  had  caused  to  he  paid  a  ransom  for  all 
**  the  American  prisoners  who  were  in  Algerine  slavery,  if 
"  he  had  told  the  Dey  that  he  did  not  w  ant  more  than  one 
*•'  quarter  of  those  captives  sent  liome  to  the  land  of  liberty 
"and  to  the  enjoyment  of  their  families,  for  wliich  they  had 
"so  long  sighed  in  bondage ;  and  that  he  might  wear  out  the 
"rest  witli  fatiuue  and  whips  ?  But  the  good  man's  soul  was 
'*  never  satisfied  until  tliey  all  came  home,  and  with  songs  of 
"joyous  liberty  hailed  the  land  of  their  nativity  !  And  bles- 
'•'  sed  be  the  Captain  of  our  salvation  ;  he,  also,  shall  see  of  the 
"  travail  of  his  soul  and  he  satisfied,  when  all  tlie  ransomed  of 
"the  Lord  shall  return  and  come  to  Zion,  with  songs  and 
"  everlasting  joys  upon  their  heads,  when  they  shall  obtain 
"joy  and  gladness,  and  sorrow  and  sighing  shall  flee  away.^'* 

My  opponent  also  quotes  Isa.  53  :  11.  "He  shall  see  of 
"  the  travail  of  his  soul  and  be  satisfied."  He  then  speaks  as 
follows,  viz.  "I  think  there  is  no  christian  but  will  aj^ree 
"  with  me  that  this  is  spoken  in  relation  to  the  salvation  by 
"  Jesus  Christ.  Then  I  ask  will  the  Messiah,  Clirist,  thft 
*•  Son  of  God,  be  satisfied  with  coming  short  of  what  he  came 
"  into  the  world  to  do  ?     And  for  what  did  tlie  Redeemer's 


♦  Ballou  on  Atonement,  p.  205. 

vS. 


138 

''  soul  travail  ?  Wliat  did  he  come  into  the  world  to  do  ?  His 
*'  soul  travailed  for  the  spiritual  birth  of  the  world.  He 
''*  came  into  the  world  to  save  it.  Il\  then,  this  is  not  done, 
^*  will  he  be  satisfied  ?  But  *  he  shall  see  of  the  ti'avail  of  his 
"  soul'.  Tlie  word,  travail,  here  means  labour,  sorrow  and 
^*  trouble ;  and  Jesus  was  a  man  of  sori'ows,  and  acquainted 
"with  grief,  I  dare  say  there  are  many  in  this  assembly 
"  who  know  the  full  meaning  of  the  metaphor  without  far- 
"ther  explanation;  and  to  bring  the  matter  home  to  them, 
"  may  I  not  be  permitted  to  apply  it  in  a  natural  sense,  and 
*^  modestly  ask  this  question,  is  it  possible  that  any  thing 
*^*  short  of  the  birth  or  deli^cra«ce  of  all  for  whom  the  soul 
"travaileth  should  give  satisfaction  ?  If  two  or  more  were 
'*  the  cause  of  the  labour,  would  such  a  soul  be  satisfied  with 
'*  the  birth  of  one  ?  Certainly  not.  Just  so  it  is,  in  relation 
"to  the  ti'avail  of  the  Redeemer's  soul :  and  if  this  travail, 
**  this  labour,  toil,  and  bloody  sweat  be  undertaken  for  all 

"  mankind,  and  who  can  say  it  was  not, must  not 

"  all  men  be  born  again,  and  consequently  be  saved,  before 
**  the  Redeemer's  soul  is  satisfied  ?  Yes,  my  hearers,  for  he 
"never  can  be  satisfied  with  any  thing  short  of  it."» 

A  disciple  of  Winchester,  might  strengthen  the  argument 
by  the  folloAAing  view  of  the  passages  already  quoted. 

1.  They  prove  the  incompetency  of  man  to  his  own  salva- 
tion. In  2  Cor.  15:  14,  it  is  said  that  "if  one  died  for  all, 
then  were  ail  deacV^  In  Rom.  5:  6,  it  is  said  that  "  when  we 
were  yet  without  strength,  Christ  died  for  the  ungodly." 
Ungodly  sinners  who  are  cdl  dead,  and  without  strength,  can- 
not save  themselves. 

2.  They  prove  the  design  of  Christ  in  suffering,  and  the 
design  of  the  Father  in  sending  him.  He  came  to  "  save 
his  people  from  their  sins  ;"  — "  that  he  might  bring  us  to 
God;'* — "that  whether  we  wake  or  sleep,  we  should  live  to- 
gether with  him  ;" — "  The  Father  sent  the  Son  to  be  the 
^Saviour  of  the  world  ;" — "  that  the  world  through  him  might 
be  saved," 

3.  They  prove  that  Christ  actually  tasted  death  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  sinners  ;  for  substitution  is  the  force  of  the  word 
huper,^  for,  in  several  of  the  passages  adduced.  He  tasted 
"death,  huper,  fur  every  man;"'^  that  is,  as  the  substitute  of 
every  mail.  "  For  Christ  also  hath  once  suffered  for  sins,  the 
just,  huper^  for  the  unjust;^   that  is,  as  the  substitute  of  the 

•  Minutes,  pp.  290, 291.  b  c^ne 

c  Hcbr.  2:  9.  d  1.  Pet.  3;  18. 


139 

unjust  "  For  when  wc  woi-c  without  strength,  iii^due 
tiiiie,  Christ  died,  /uiper,  for  the  ungodly.  F«»r  scarcely, 
huper,for  a  riglitcous  man  \Nill  one  dicj  yet  perad venture, 
huper,  for  a  good  man  some  would  even  dare  to  die  ;  but 
God  commendeth  his  love  toward  us,  in  that  while  we 
were  yet  sinners,  Christ  died,  hupevj  for  us.'**  On  this 
last  verse  Doddridge,  wlio  is  by  no  means  a  Universalist, 
quotes  a  note  of  Raplielius  from  Zcnophon,  after  which 
he  remarks  that  Raphelius  "  has  abundantly  demonstrated 
that  fiuper  hemon  apeiltane^'  signifies  he  died  in  our  room 
and  stead:  nor  can  I  find  that  apitthauein  huper  finos^^ 
has  ever  any  other  siguilicatiou  than  rescuing  the  life  of 
another,  at  the  expense  of  our  own;  and  tlte  very  next  verse, 
(i.  e.  verse  7.)  shews,  iudependeutly  of  any  other  authority, 
how  evidently  it  bears  tiiat  sense  here,  as  one  can  liardly 
imagine  how  any  one  would  die  for  a  good  man,  unless  it 
were  to  redeem  his  life  by  giving  up  his  own." 

In  1  Tim.  2:  6,  the  word  rendered  ransom,  contains  the 
idea  of  substitution  as  clearly  as  the  preposition  which  ac- 
companies it.  '•  Who  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all,  antUu- 
tron  huper  panton.'^'^  On  this  subject,  Turrettin,  who  was 
far  from  Ui.iversalism,  says,  "  The  word  lutron  might 
"admitof  ([nibbling,  but  nothing  can  be  more  express  than  the 
«  word  (intmtron.  it  denotes  not  meiely  a  price,  but  such  a 
«  price  as  is  perfectly  equal  to  the  debt  which  it  pays  j  this 
**  is  the  force  of  tlie  preposition  anil  which  expresses  sub- 
«  stifution.  Aristotle,  who  surely  understood  the  Greek  lan- 
"guage,  uses  the  word  antilutron  in  the  9tU  book  of  his 
«  Ethics,  and  2d  chapter  to  denote  the  redemption  or  pur- 
«  chase  of  a  life  by  substituting  another  life  in  its  room." 

4.  This  supposed  disciple  of  Winchester,  might  urge, 
moreover,  from  tlie  foregoing  authorities,  that  in  virtue  of 
this  substitution,  men  are  not  merely  brought  into  a  state  of 
salvahUity,  but  a  state  of  salvation.  Paul  does  not  say  that 
Christ  mail  be  the  Saviour  of  all  men,  but  that  he  "  is  the 
Saviour  of  all  men.''e  He  does  not  say  that  grace  may  bring 
salvation,  and  may  appear  to  all  men  ;  but  "  the  grace  of 
God  that  bringeth  salvation  hath  appeared  to  all  men;''f 
and  *«  where  sin  abounded,  grace  did  much  more  abound.'g 
He  does  not  speak  of  a  possible,  but  of  a  positive  justification. 
"  The  free  gift  came  upon  alt*  ^nen  xmio  justification  of  lifc^^i^ 

a  Rom.  5*  6 8.  >  '  >i^  ^.uirv  an-.5«M  c    «)ro5«viivi!3-if  nvej 

d»vTi>.uT(ov  Jn-ie  vxvrjut  e  1  Tim.  4;  10.        f  Tit.  2j  11. 

g  Rom.  5;  20,  h  Rom.  5;  ISl. 


140 

He  speaks  as  positively  of  their  resurrection  and  glorificatiok. 
*'  As  in  Adam  all  die,  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive^'' 
"  Tliat  as  sin  hath  reigned  unto  death,  even  so  might  grace 
"reign  through  righteousness  unto  eternal  life  by  Jesus 
**  Christ  our  Lord."* 

Now  let  me  ask  if  our  being  ungodly  or  without  strength, 
can  ruin  those  for  whom  Christ  intercedes  ?  When  he  came 
to  save  the  world,  and  when  the  Father  sent  him  to  be  the 
Saviour  ofthe  world,  was  either  of  them  disappointed?  Will 
God  claim  satisfaction  to  Ins  law  and  justice  from  the  indi- 
vidual offenders,  when  he  has  already  received,  by  covenant, 
a  vicarious  satisfaction,  through  the  meritorious  substitution 
of  our  approved  Surety  ?f  After  his  stripes  have  healed  us, 
shall  we  be  wounded  again  ?  Shall  not  his  Father  give  unto 
him  the  travail  of  his  soul,  until  he  shall  be  satisfied  ?  Can 
he  be  the  Saviour  of  all  men,  and  yet  some  men  not  be 
saved  ?  Can  those  be  condemned  to  death,  upon  whom  he 
has  bestowed  justification  of  life,  a  glorious  resurrection, 
and  a  happy  immortality? 

A  conscientious  answer  to  these  interrogatories,  as  in  the 
presence  of  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth,  to  whom  we  are 
responsible  for  the  manner  in  which  we  handle  his  word, 
shall  commence  my  reply  to  this  argument  relating  to  Christ's 
priestly  office.  It  is  my  sincere  opinion  that  Christ's  prayers 
are  always  answered,  and  that  all  for  whom  he  intercedes  are 
saved  ; — that  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  not  disappointed  in 
their  designs  of  salvation,  with  regard  to  a  single  indivi- 
dual ; — that  the  atonemoit  of  Christ  is  a  vicaiious  satisfac- 
tion to  all  the  demands  of  God's  law  and  justice,  and  that  the 
father  will  not  again  require  this  essentially  requisite  satis- 
faction from  any  for  whom  it  has  once  been  rendered  by 
Clirist  our  substitute  ,• — that  he  will  never  again  wound  those 
who  are  healed  by  his  stripes ; — that  he  will  give  to  our  Sure- 
ty the  full  amount  of  the  travail  of  his  soul  until  he  is  perfect- 
ly satisfied  ; — that  all  for  wliom  he  died,  shall  be  really  and 
not  nominally  saved; — that  they  shall  really  enjoy  justifica- 
tion of  life,  a  resuri-ection  in  Christ,  and  immortal  glory.  If, 
therefore,  it  be  the  design  of  the  Holy  Trinity  to  save  all  uni- 
versally ; — if  the  atonenient  and  intercession  of  Christ  be  for 
all  universally^  he  will  save  all  universally.  The  major  pi'o- 
position  of  the  Universalist  syllogism  given  some  time  since, 
I  admit  to  be  established  from  Scripture,  that  Christ  saves  all 
for  whom  he  dies.     If  tlie  word  of  God  will  establish  the  mi- 

*1  Cor.  15;  22.    Rom.  5;  17. 21.  t  See  Hebr.  7;  22. 


141 

nor  proposition,  that  he  died  for  all  men  universally^  then  I 
admit  the  conclusion  that  all  men  universally  shall  be  saved. 
As  I  believe  that  salvation  is  certainly  and  irreversibly  con- 
nected with  an  interest  in  Christ's  priestly  office,  my  objec- 
tions shall  Ise  made  only  to  the  univei'sality  of  its  exercise  : 
and  shall  consist  chiefly  of  a  fair  exananation  of  Univcrsalist 
authorities  in  their  connexion  in  the  Bible.  Preparatory  to 
this  I  would  mark  the  following  points. 

1.  There  are  some  for  whom  Christ  was  not  a  sacrifice,  and 
who  shall  not  be  profited  by  his  death.  To  the  judaizing 
Galatians,  the  Apostle  said,  "  Behold,  I,  Paul,  say  unto  you, 
that  if  ye  be  circumcised,  Christ  shall  profit  you  nothing." 
Again,  *•  Christ  is  become  of  no  effect  unto  you,  whosoever  of 
you  arc  justified  by  the  law."*  Now  it  is  an  undeniable 
fact  that  millions  did  then  and  do  still  look  to  the  law 
foi' justification,  and  receive  religious  ordinances  on  that  foot- 
ing. These,  according  to  the  Apostle,  have  fallen  short  of 
that  grace  which  bringeth  salvation.  Christ  profits  them  no- 
thiny ;  he  is  of /to  effect  unto  them.  This  is  as  much  as  to  say 
that  they  have  no  interest  in  his  priestly  office,  which  is 
the  ground  of  justification  to  all  who  are  saved. 

In  Hebrews  10:  26 — 29,  the  same  Apostle  says,  **  for  if  we 
•*  sin  wilfully,  after  that  we  have  received  the  knowledge  of 
^^  the  truth,  there  rcmaineth  no  more  sacrifice  for  sins,  but  a 
"  certain  fearful  looking  for  of  judgment  and  fiery  indigna- 
"  tion,  which  shall  devour  the  adversaries.  He  that  despised 
*•  Moses'  law,  died  without  mercy,  under  two  or  three  wit- 
"  nesses  ;  of  how  much  sorer  punishment,  suppose  ye,  shall  he 
"  be  thought  worthy,  who  hath  trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of 
"  God,  and  hath  counted  the  blood  of  the  covenant  wherewith 
"  he  was  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing,  and  hath  done  despite 
"  unto  the  Spirit  of  grace  ?"  As  in  the  former  passage,  the 
Galatians  were,  in  their  own  esteem,  justified  by  the  law,  so 
in  this  passage,  some  of  the  Hebrews  were,  in  their  own  es- 
teem, sanctified  by  the  blood  of  the  Covenant.  Yet  these 
Hebrews  afterward  counted  this  blood  an  unholy  thing,  and 
did  despite  unto  the  Spirit  of  grace.  Therefore,  as  Christ  did 
not  profit  the  Galatians,  and  was  of  no  effect  to  them,  so,  for 
these  Hebrews  of  a  particular  description,f  there  remaineth  no 
more  sacrifice  for  sins.  As  the  Galatians  fell  short  of  justifica- 
tion through  the  grace  of  God,so  theseHebrews  incurred  a  much 
sorer  punishment  than  that  temporal  death  which  Moses  in- 
flicted, without  mercy,  upon  the  violators  of  his  law  ;  even 

*  Gal.  5;  2.  4.  t  Those  who  had  committed  the  unpardonable  sin. 


14^ 

that  etcniiil  judgment  andjierrj  indignation  which  shall  devoui' 
the  adversaries.  Tliat  this  means  a  condemnation  to  eternal 
fire  aftpr  the  general  judgment,  is  evident  from  its  being  here 
contrasted  with  the  most  fearful  temporal  punishment,  and 
represented  a  much  sorer  punishment ;  and  from  its  being  re- 
presented in  chap.  6,  vei'se  2,  as  an  "  eternal  judgment,"  suc- 
ceeding the  resurrection  from  the  dead. 

Here  then  are  Jews  and  Gentiles,  who  are  determined  to 
follow  their  own  way  of  justification  and  sanctification.  Some 
sin  through  the  guile  of  false  teachers,  and  others  sin  wilful- 
ly and  knowingly.  It  is  declared  that  Clirist  is  of  no  effect 
to  either  of  them;  that  neither  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  nor 
any  other  sacrifice  shall  profit  them  ;  but  that  aftei-  the  re- 
surrection of  the  dead,  they  must  expect  to  be  adjudged  to 
eternal  fire.  Were  the  Father  and  the  Son  disappointed  in 
their  fall  ?  No  more  than  in  that  of  rebel  angels.  Without 
either  the  one  or  the  other,  the  Holy  Jesus  shall  be  satisfied, 
in  receiving  the  full  amount  of  the  travail  of  his  soul. 

2.  There  are  some  from  whom  their  ow  n  debt  will  be  ex- 
acted to  the  utmost.  This  immaculate  Redeemer  speaks  a 
very  intelligible  language  on  this  subject,  in  his  sermon  on 
the  mount.  "  Agree  with  thine  adversfiry  quickly  whilst  thou 
"  art  in  the  way  with  him;  lest  at  any  time,  the  adversary  dc- 
"  liver  thee  to  the  judge,  and  the  judge  deliver  thee  to  the  of- 
"  ficer,  and  thou  be  cast  into  prison.  Verily  1  say  unto  you, 
"thou  shaltby  no  means,  come  out  thence,  till  thou  hast  paid 
"  the  uttermost  farthing ;"  "  the  very  last  mite."*  When  the 
Apostle  tells  the  Galatians  that  on  account  of  their  reli- 
ance on  circumcision,  Christ  should  profit  them  nothing  ; 
that  is,  he  should  not  pay  their  debt,  he  informs  them 
that  in  consequence  of  their  self-righteousness,  they 
should  be  held  accountable  themselves.  "For  I  testify 
"  again  to  every  man  that  is  circumcised,  that  he  is 
*<  a  debtor  to  do  the  whole  law."  Like  the  debtors  men- 
tioned in  Luke  7:  41.  42,  one  owes  five  hundred  pence 
and  the  other  fifty,  and  they  have  nothing  to  pay:  for  our  Sa- 
viour says,  "  without  me  ye  can  do  nothing,"  and  these 
debtors  have  rejected  him  to  depend  upon  themselves. 
Now  here  are  persons  deeply  in  debt,  and  perfectly  insolvent, 
while  running  at  large,  in  this  world,  and  they  are  sentenced 
by  an  infallibly  righteous  Judge,  to  imprisonment  hereafter, 
until  the  uttermost  farthing  is  paid ;  and  paid  not  by  our 
Surety,  whom  they  have  rejected,  but  by  themselves.  If  the 

*  Matt.  5j  25.  26.    Luke  12;  59. 


143 

debt  had  been  paid  by  the  Surety,  justice  would  have  pro- 
cured their  release.  They  would  not  only  have  been  pre- 
served from  tl||p  eternal  prison,  but  delivered  from  the  chains 
of  unbelief  in  this  life.  Their  being  confined  by  infinite  jus- 
tice, as  debtors  to  do  the  whole  law,  is  a  proof  that  Christ, 
who  is  the  end  of  the  law  for  righteousness  to  every  one  that 
believeth,  did  not  satisfy  the  law,  as  the  Surety  of  these  par- 
ticular debtors,  any  more  than  of  fallen  angels.  It  was 
in  Christ's  priestly  office,  that  he  paid  the  debt  of  believers  by 
satisfying  the  law  in  their  behalf:  but  here  are  unbelicA^ers 
who  are  held  personally  responsible  for  the  last  mite.  Ihey, 
therefore,  can  have  no  interest  in  his  meritorious  substitution, 
and  must  be  exceptions  to  those  general  expressions,  in  which 
he  is  said  to  be  the  Saviour  of  a//  men.  As  they  have  reject- 
ed Christ,  and  can  do  nothing  without  him,  their  insolvency 
is  irren»ediable,  and  their  confinement,  of  course,  eternal.  In 
this  awful,  but  righteous  dispensation,  the  Holy  Trinity  is 
not  disappointed  in  any  of  its  plans.  The  design  of  tlie  Atone- 
ment is  fully  answered  in  the  salvation  of  those  for  whom 
it  was  made  In  their  regeneration  to  holiness,  and  resur,- 
rection  to  gloiy,  the  Redeemer  "  siiall  see  of  the  travail  of 
his  soul,  and  shall  be  satisfied.'' 

To  Mr.  Ballou's  illustration  of  this  subject  I  can  see  no  valid 
objection.  General  Wasliington  could  not  be  satisfied  with 
the  return  of  a  less  number  of  Algerine  captives,  than  he  had 
ransomed.  But  when  he  was  fully  satisfied  in  the  return  of 
all  his  ransomed  countrymen,  there  remained  behind,  and 
there  yet  remain,  many  pi'isoners  who  are  doomed  to  that  se- 
vere servitude,  until  they  shall  pay  the  last  mite  of  their  own 
ransom.  Does  not  this  prove  that  they  had  no  interest  in 
Washington's  ransom  ? — that  it  was  not  intended  for  them  ? 
but  only  for  his  own  countrymen  ?  This  may  appear  a  cen- 
surable partiality  in  Washington  :  Godwin  may  condemn 
him  for  loving  his  countrymen  more  than  foreigners,  as  he 
has  censured  parents  for  a  peculiar  attachment  to  their  own 
children,  and  as  many  censure  Christ  for  a  peculiar  regard 
to  his  sheep,  in  laying  down  his  life.  Although  I  apjjrove  of  all 
these  attachments,  it  is  not  theu'  morality  that  is  now  before  us. 
The  question  is,  did  Christ  ransom  all  men  universally,  or  on- 
ly such  as  he  shall  actually  deliver  from  condemnation,  cor-- 
ruption  and  punishment  ?  Did  he  ransom  those,  who,  ac- 
cording to  his  solemn  declaration,  shall  be  kept  in  prison,  un- 
til they  pay  their  own  debt,  to  the  very  last  mite  i  No  more 
than  Washington  ransomed  those  unhappy  Europeans  who 


144 

arc  still  in  Algeririe  boiulage.  But  those  whom  Christ  ha» 
lelt  in  hopeless  punishment,  are  his  eneinies :  and  if  any 
American  in  Algieis  had  manifested  that  iwicorous  and 
traitorous  hostility  to  his  counti*y\s  President  and  constitu- 
tion, which  Mr.  Ballon  and  my  opponent  have  evinced  to- 
ward Christ's  Divinity  and  Atonement,  Washington  would 
either  have  left  him  in  \frica,  or  brought  him  hi)me  to  th« 
enjoyment  of  thati-ope  which  he  had  prepared  for  Arnold. 

3.  It  has  been  proved  in  the  refutation  of  the  9th  Universa- 
list  argument,  that  general  tei-ms  are  a- ery  often,  if  not  gene- 
rally, used  in  a  limited  signification.  A  dissertation  was 
given  on  the  word  a//,  a  word  which  frequently  occurs,  and 
on  which  much  stress  is  laid,  in  the  texts  brouglit  to  support 
this  10th  argument.  The  evidence  there  adduced,  show$ 
that  in  the  passages  here  cited,  this  word  may  be  used  in  a 
limited  sense,  but  in  some  of  these  texts  it  proves  not  only 
that  it  mmj  he,  but  that  it  is  thus  used.  In  one  of  them,* 
Paul  exhorts  that  "  supplications,  prayers,  intercessions,  and 
giving  of  thanks  be  made  for  all  men;"  and  Mr.  Ballon  in- 
sinuates that  this  is  a  proof  of  the  universality  of  Christ's 
priestly  office.  Now  it  is  a  well  known  fact,  that  the  Scrip- 
tures deny  a  universal  intercession,  both  in  his  case  and  in 
ours.  In  John  17  :  9,  he  says,  "  I  pray  not  for  the  world, 
but  for  them  which  thou  hast  given  me;  for  they  are  thine." 
And  although  in  the  passage  from  I  Tim.  we  are  exhorted 
to  pray  for  all  men  generally,  vet  in  1  John  5: 16,  we  are  re- 
lieved from  praying  for  the  unpardonable  sin.  This,  then, 
establishes  a  matter  of  criticism,  the  meaning  of  the  word 
all ;  and  a  matter  of  doctrine,  the  objective  ex  tent  of  Christ's 
priesthood.  It  is  here  asserted  by  himself,  that  he  inter- 
cedes for  none  but  those  whom  the  Fathei-  has  given  him, 
and  these  are  contrasted  with  the  world,  as  coustituting  a 
part  and  not  the  whole  of  mankind.  And  would  he  die  for 
those  whom  the  Father,  in  divine  sovereignty  has  not  given 
him,  and  for  whom  he  will  not  pray.^  I  might  rather  ask, 
will  not  the  Holy  Trinity  conspire  to  bestow  every  benefit 
upon  those  from  whom  it  has  not  withheld  Heaven's  great- 
est blessing  1  "  He  that  spared  not  his  own  Son,  but  deli 
vered  him  up  for  us  all,  [that  is,  for  believers  like  Paul;  all 
whom  the  Father  had  given  him  ;  for  lie  gave  us  to  him,  and 
him  to  ?«;]  how  shall  he  not  with  him  also  freely  give  u$ 
all  things  ?"b  Thus  it  appears  that  he  imparts  every  neces- 
sary blessing  to  those  for  whom  he  died  ; — But  there  aro 

a  1  Tiro.  2;  1.  b  Bona.  8.32. 


145 

,*ome  from  whom  he  withholds  the  benefit  of  his  interces- 
sion, which  is  essential  to  their  welfare; — Therefore  there 
are  some  for  whom  he  did  not  die.  To  show  that  his  sa- 
rrifice  and  intercession,  (both  sacerdotal  functions,)  are  co- 
extensive, and  that  they  are  effectual  to  tlie  salvation  of  all 
for  whom  they  are  made,  we  cannot  easily  invent  plainer 
words  than  Paul  uses  in  Rom.  8:  34.  "  Who  is  he  that  con- 
*•  demneth?  It  is  Christ  that  died,  yea,  rather  that  is  risen 
«  again,  who  is  even  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  who  also 
•*  maketh  intercession  for  us.''  Here  it  is  said  concerning 
the  same  class  of  mankind,  that  Christ  died  and  rose  again, 
and  intercedes  in  Heaven  for  them.  This  class  is  denoted 
by  the  pronoun  us,  the  same  us  to  whom,  in  the  preceding 
context,  he  promises  every  good  thing,  because  he  had  de- 
livered up  Christ  for  them.  The  question  is,  does  this  US 
embrace  the  world  universally,  or  a  part  of  mankind,  who 
are  given  to  Christ  out  of  the  world  ?  Our  Saviour  has  not 
more  unequivocally  limited  his  intercession,  than  his  Apos- 
tle, in  this  8th  chapter,  from  first  to  last,  limits  his  atone- 
ment. In  the  very  first  verse  these  us  are  described  as  be- 
ing in  Christ  Jesus,  and  walking  after  the  Spirit.  In  verse 
9th  he  says,  "  now  if  any  man  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ, 
he  is  none  of  his."  How  many  have  another  spirit  in  them  I 
He  says  that  they  sutler  with  him.a  How  different  from  those 
who  trample  on  his  blood!  They  are  saved  by  hope  :^  where- 
as many  die  in  despair.  They  piay  by  the  aid  of  the  Spi- 
rit. How  different  from  those  who  blaspheme,  or  who  pray 
denying  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  !  They  love  God«  whereas 
in  verse  fth,  there  are  some  who  hate  God.  Tuese  loving, 
praying,  hoping,  suffering  souls,  who  are  in  Christ,  and  have 
Christ  and  his  spirit  in  them  ;  these  are  the  very  all  and 
the  very  us  for  whom,  as  in  verses  32.  34,  Christ  was  deli- 
vered up ;  and  for  whom  he  died  and  arose  again,  and  in- 
tercedes at  the  right  hand  of  God.  These  characteristics  do 
not  belong  to  all  men  universally :  neither  do  the  atonement 
and  intercession  of  Christ. 

Returning  to  the  point  of  criticism  now  in  hand,  it  may  be 
observed  that  the  word  world,  and  the  phrase,  the  whole  world, 
found  in  some  of  the  texts  to  be  examined,  are  generally  used 
in  a  limited  sense.  1.  The  Roman  Empire  in  the  Augustan  age, 
"  There  went  out  a  decree  from  Cesar  Augustus,  that  all  the 


a  Verse  17.  c  Verse  28. 

b  Verse  24. 

T 


U6 

**  twor/c?  should  be  taxed.''a  2.  A  multitudeiuA  certain  age  or 
"  country.  "  The  Pharisees  therefore  said  among  tiieinselves, 
** perceive  ye  how  ye  prevail  nothing?  Behold!  the  wund 
"  is  gone  after  iiini."i'  3.  The  churdies  generally  in  the 
"  first  Century.  "  I  thank  my  God,  through  Jesus  Christ, 
'*  foi'  you  all  that  your  faith  is  spoken  of  th?-oughout  (/te 
"  wiiole  worlfVc  4.  Believers  in  general.  "  For  the  bread 
**  of  Grod  is  he  which  cometh  down  from  heaven,  and  giveth 
"life  unto  the  world:**  that  is  to  believers,  as  the  whole 
"  chapter  proves ;  in  w  hich  he  says  **  I  am  the  bread  of  life :  he 
"  that  come  I  h  to  me  shall  never  hunger ;  and  he  that  beiieveth 
" on  me  shall  never  thrist."  **  I  am  the  living  biead 
"  which  came  down  from  heaven."  "  If  any  man  eat  of  this 
**  bread,  he  shall  live  forever :  and  the  bread  tliat  I  will 
"give  is  my  flesh,  which  1  will  give  for  the  lifeof  </<«  world,''- ^ 
6.  Those  who  ai*e  not  given  to  Christ.  "I  pray  not  for  the 
"  world,  but  for  them  wliich  thou  hast  given  mc."«  6.  For 
those  whom  the  Father  has  given  him,  and  for  whose  redemp- 
tion he  was  slain,  butparticulai'ly  of  the  Gentiles,  as  distinct 
from  the  Jews.  **  Now  if  the  fall  of  them  [the  Jews]  be  the 
"  riches  of  tlie  world,  and  the  diminishing  of  them,  the  riches 
'•  of  the  Gentiles,  how  much  more  their  fulness  !"f  "  And  he 
"  is  the  pi'opitiation  for  our  sins :  and  not  for  ours  only,  but 
for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world.'''  ?  Does  he  mean  that  he  is 
the  propitiation  not  only  for  the  sins  of  believers,  but  for  the 
sins  of  unbelievers  ? not  only  for  the  penitent  and  obedi- 
ent, but  for  the  incorrigibly  impenitent  and  disobedient? 
Would  not  this  make  men  indifferent  to  faith  and  holiness, 
and  would  it  not  teach  that  Christ  became  a  propitiatory  sacri- 
fice for  those  whose  cause  he  would  not  advocate  in  heaven 
as  their  interceding  High  Priest.  That  he  wrote  to  excite 
an  abhorrence  of  sin,  and  to  teach  that  Christ's  intercessiou 
and  propitiation  were  coextensive,  is  evident  from  the  prece- 
ding verse.  "My  little  children,  these  things  I  write  unto 
"you,  that  ye  sin  not.  And  if  any  man  sin,  we  have  an  ad- 
"  vocatc  with  the  Father,  Jesus  Christ  the  righteous."  For 
whom  is  he  an  advocate  ?  "I  pray  not  for  the  world,  but  for 
**  them  whom  thou  has  given  me."  For  their  sins  then,  he  is 
a  propitiation.  These  arc  called  the  whole  worlds  as  Paul  in 
tlie  first  sense  given  above  called  Gentile  believers  the  world, 
in  contradistinction  from  the  Jews,  who  thought  that  they  were 

a  l.ukc2.  1.  d  John  6.  33.  35.  51. 

b  John  12.  10.  e  John  17.  9. 

c  Uom.  1.  S.  f  Rom.  11.12. 

g  1  John  2.  2". 


147 

forever  to  monopolize  the  benefits  of  revealed  religion.  The 
Apostles  themselves  relinciuished  this  prejudice  with  great 
reluctance,  even  alter  the  ascension  of  our  Lord  and  tiie  des- 
cent of  the  Holy  Ghost.  When  Peter's  pertinacity  was  over- 
come by  the  grace  of  God,  accompanied  with  extraordinary 
visions,  and  communications,  and  effusions  of  the  Spirit, 
"  then  Petei'  opened  his  mouth,  and  said,  of  a  truth  I  perceive 
^*that  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons:"  that  is,  he  has  not 
now  that  exclusive  love  for  tlie  Jews,  a  mistaken  apprehen- 
sion of  winch  made  me  unwilling  to  visit  this  Gentile  family; 
but  I  find  that  he  is  a  respecter  of  all  men  alike.  How  ?  Has 
he  an  equal  respect  for  believers  and  unbelievers  ?  Let  Pe- 
ter speak  for  himself.  "  Of  a  ti'uth  I  perceive  that  God  is 
"  no  respecter  of  persons:  but  in  every  nation  he  that  year. 
"  e<A  him,  and  wor^e^A  righteousness  is  accepted  of  him."  a 
The  Apostle  John  contended  witii  the  same  prejudices  and  dif- 
ficulties, and  he  comes  to  the  same  conclusion.  "He  is  the 
''propitiation  for  our  sins ;  [that  is,  for  the  sins  of  us  belie- 
"ving  Jews,]  and  not  for  ours  only,  but  for  tiie  sins  of  the 
*'  whole  world :"  that  is  for  all  in  every  nation,  who  fear 
^*  God  and  work  righteousness.  That  he  was  slain  for  the 
*'  redemption  of  such  and  such  only,  the  same  Apostle  has 
"  declared  in  Rev.  5  :  9.  "  For  thou  wast  slain,  and  has  re- 
"  deemed  us  to  God  by  thy  blood,  out  of  every  kindred  and 
**  tongue,  and  people  and  nation."  When  therefore,  we  are 
"  told  that  Christ  is  the  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  whole 
"  w^orld,  we  are  to  understand,  (himself  being  judge,)  that 
**  he  redeems  believers  out  of  every  nation:  as  when  he  tells 
"us,  that  in  the  day  of  judgment,  "  all  kindreds  of  the  earth 
"  shall  wail  because  of  him,"  ^  he  means  that  unbelievers, 
out  of  all  kindreds  shall  be  condemned  and  punished.  Thus 
it  appears  that  these  general  expressions  are  often  used  in  a 
limited  signification,  and  that  theii'  limits  are  defined  by  the 
writers  who  use  them. 

4.  Before  engaging  in  a  fuller  examination  of  the  texts 
brought  to  support  a  universal  atonement,  one  more  point 
seems  to  claim  our  attention.  While  the  purchase  of  the 
Redeetner  is  often  denoted  by  general  expressions  with  a 
limited  significahon,  the  boundaries  of  his  blood-bought  fa- 
mily are  also  frequently  defined  by  limited  expressions  in  an 
exclusive  sense,  feuch  a  fact  should  relieve  us  from  all  dif- 
ficulty in  the  explanation  of  texts  relating  to  this  subject. 

a  Acts  10 :  34.  55.  b  Rev.  1;  7. 


148 

The  church  invisible  is  pointed  out  in  Scripture  under  the 
denomination  of  sheep  and  people,  friends  and  brethren, 
children,  bride,  and  body.  In  the  day  of  judgment  the 
sheep  shall  be  placed  on  his  right  hand,  and  the  ^oafs  on  the 
left.  But  the  Judge  himself  said,  during  his  humiliation, 
"  I  lay  down  my  life  for  the  sheepJ**^  Thegoats  then  are  ex- 
cluded from  his  atonement,  as  they  shall  be  from  his  glory. 
He  received  the  name  of  Jesus,  because  "  he  shall  save  his 
people  from  their  sins."**  There  are  many  peo/j/e  unwilling  to 
the  last,  to  receive  him  as  a  Saviour  from  sin.  To  the  ex- 
clusion of  these,  it  is  said,  *H\\y  people  shall  be  willing  in 
the  day  of  thy  power,  in  the  beauty  of  holiness.*'^  Many 
of  this  sort  of  people^  whom  God  had  determined  to  make 
willing,  were  in  Corinth  in  Paul's  day  ;  for  God  told  him, 
"I  have  much  joeo/j/e  in  this  city.*'*^  Did  this  embrace  the. 
heathen  population  universally  ?  Not  unless  they  were  uni- 
versally willing  to  renounce  sin  and  follow  holiness,  through 
the  spirit  of  a  holy  Saviour.  Although  Christ  died  for  his 
enemies,  it  was  only  for  those  whose  enmity  was  to  be  des- 
troyed. In  John  13:  14,  he  speaks  of  dying  for  his /Wen</s 
to  the  exclusion  of  those,  concerning  whon?  he  shall  say  in 
the  great  day,  *'But  these  mine  enemies^  which  would  not 
that  I  should  reign  over  them,  bring  hither,  and  slay  them 
before  me."*^  There  are  some  who  are  ashamed  of  Christ 
in  this  crooked  and  perverse  generation.  Of  these  he  has 
said  that  he  will  be  ashamed  before  his  Father  and  the  holy 
Angels.  To  the  exclusion  of  these,  therefore,  he  says  of 
some,  that  ♦'  he  is  not  ashamed  to  call  them  brethren.''  This 
is  only  two  verses  after  Hebr.  2:  9,  where  it  is  said  that  "he 
3hould  taste  death  for  every  man:"  or  as  it  might  be  more 
consistently  translated.  *' for  every  brother,''^  from  verse  11th; 
or  "  for  every  child,"  from  verse  1  Sth  :  for  let  it  be  remem- 
bered that  this  is  the  evident  meaning  of  the  writer,  since 
the  word  ?na7i  is  only  given  him  by  our  translators,  and  he 
actually  mentioned  brethren  and  children  as  the  exclusive 
subjects  of  the  atonement.  This  observation  concerning 
children  is  confirmed  by  the  inspired  words  of  Caiaphas, 
who  "  prophecicd  that  Jesus  should  die  for  that  nation,  and 
not  for  that  nation  only,  but  that  also  he  should  gather  to- 
gether in  one,  the  children  of  God  that  were  scattered  a- 
broad.^f   These  children  of  God  have  thus  far  been  a  sparse 

aJohnlO;15,  oPs.  110.  3.  d  Aots  18.  10. 

b  Matt.  1.  21,  e  Luke  19.  27. 

f  John  11;  .11.  52.  How  this  regembles  1  John  2- 3,inexprestion«ndmeaniogr! 


population,  buttliey  arc  destined  one  day  to  fill  tlie  earth. 
They  are  the  travail  of  the  Redeemer's  soul,  with  which  he 
shall  be  satisfied.     "  When  thou  shalt  make  his  soul  an  ot- 
ferine  for  sin,  he  shall  see  his  seed,  he  shall  prolong  his  days, 
and  the  pleasure  of  the  Lord  shall  prosper  in  hishand^  «  In- 
stead of  confusing  the  spiritual  seed  with  the  Wof  theser- 
pent,  which  embraces  incorrigible  offenders,  the  Scriptures 
contrast  them.   To  the  serper.t  God  says,  "  1  will  put  enmi- 
ty between  thee  and  the  woman,  and  between  thy  seed  and 
\i^vseedr  If  he  had  intended  to  embiace  both  in  the  promise 
to  Abraham,  «  and  in  thy  seed  shall  all  the  nations  of  the 
earth  be  blessed.""  he  would  have  given  us  the  word  m  the 
plural  and  not  in  the  singular  number.     «  Now  to  Abraham 
and  his  seed  were  the  promises  made :  he  saith  not,  and  to 
seeds,  as  of  many,  but  as  of  one,  and  to  thy  seed,  which  is 
Christ:"'=  that  is,  Christ  mystical,  embracing  all  the  mem- 
bers of  that  one  body  of  which  he  is  the  head  ;  for  "Christ  is 
the  head  of  the  church,  and  he  is  the  Saviour  of  the  body.  >' 
Does  this  bodi>  include  that  Man  of  sin,  the  son  of  perdition, 
who  opposeth'and  exalteth  himself  above  all  that  is  called 
God,  or  that  is  worshipped  ?  Does  this  «  church  of  God  which 
he  hath  purchased  with  his  own  blood,"e  include  the  syna- 
gogue of  Satan  ?  The  inspired  illustration  of  the  context, 
makes  it  as  palpable  that  it  does  not,  as  language  can  make 
it     "  Husbands  love  your  wives,  even  as  Christ  also  loved 
the  church  and  gave  himself  for  it.'"'  Here,  then,  we  have  the 
extent  of  the  atonement  plainly  defined.    Our  Saviour  proves 
from  the  very  creation  of  one  pair  in  the  beginning,  that  the 
connubial  attachment  should  be   exclusive.     He  has  thei-e- 
fore  pronounced  judgment  upon  every  roving  emotion  ot  the 
heart.     The  more  we  confine  this  affection,  to  its  proper  ob- 
iect,  the  more  we  resemble  the  Lamb  of  God  in  his  love  to  the 
heavenly  bride.^   Would  this  be  the  case  if  he  had  had  an  in- 
discriminate attachment  to  his  own  church  and  the  synagogue 
of  Satan?— if  he  hscA  given  himsef,  that  is,  if  he  had  made  an 
atonement,  for  the  man  of  sin  and  his  own  body  indifferently  ? 
As,  then,  his  atonement  is,  in  infinite  and  adorable  sovereignty, 
made  for  men  to  the  exclusion  of  devils,  so  is  it  made  for  his 
own  church  invisible,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  devil's  church 
among  men.     It  is  made  for  his  sheep  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
goats;  for  his  people  friends  and  brethren,  to  the  exclusion  of 

alsa.  53;10.  d  Eph.  5.  23. 

b  Gen.  22;  18.  c  Acts  20.  28. 

c  Gal.  3;  16.    See  J9inie«on'8  Sacred  History, 
f  Eph.  5.  25.  %  Re^-  21.  9. 


150 

those  who  remain  enemies,  and  aliens  fi'om  the  commonweaItU 
of  Israel,  and  Hti'angers  to  the  covenants  of  promise;  for  his 
seed,  children,  bride,  and  body,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  seed 
of  the  serpent,  tiie  generations  of  Amalek,  and  those  who  per- 
severe in  loA  ing  the  ( reature  moi-e  than  the  Ci'eator. 

The  discussion  of  the  above  four  particulars  was  intended 
to  facilitate  and  curtail  the  explanation  of  the  authorities  ad- 
vanced for  a  uniAersal  atonement.  In  its  progress  several 
of  those  texts  were  partly,  and  some  sufficiently  cleared.  The 
first  of  those  which  remain,  was,  if  I  mistake  not,  nsed  by  Dr. 
Chauncey,  that  great  champion  of  Univci'salism,  from  whom 
many  of  the  others  also  were  taken.  It  is  1  Cor.  15:  3, 
**  Christ  died  for  our  sins,  according  to  the  scriptures." 
Whose  sins  are  these  ?  They  are  the  sins  of  us',  and  in  what 
was  said  in  Rom.  8th,  in  the  3rd  head  above,  it  will  be  recol- 
lected that  tlic  us  for  whonj  Christ  died,  was  composed  of 
believers.  In  this  case  the  same  thing  a])pears  from  the 
verse  immediately  preceding.  "  By  which  also  ye  were 
saved,  if  ye  keep  in  memory  what  I  preached  unto  you,  unless 
ye  have  believed  in  vain."  By  putting  these  2d  and  3rd 
verses  together,  we  find  that  Christ's  dying  for  our  sins,  is 
the  meritorious  cause,  and  faith  the  instrumental  cause  of  our 
salvation. 

But  this  is  said  to  be  according  to  the  scriptures;  that  is, 
of  the  old  Testament :  for  the  testimony  of  Jesus  is  the  spirit 
of  prophecy,  and  Moses  w  rote  of  him.  There,  the  redemp- 
tion of  Christ  is  usually  adumbrated  by  a  temporal  redemp- 
tion. "  What  nation  in  the  earth  is  like  thy  people,  even  like 
Israel,  whom  God  went  to  redeem  for  a  people  to  himself  ?"a 
This  temporal  redemption,  however,  was  from  God's  pecu- 
liar love  to  Israel,  to  the  exclusion  of  other  nations,  and  at 
their  expense.  This  is  attested  by  the  law  and  the  prophets. 
Moses  says  "  I  will  put  a  division,  (Engl,  margin  and  Hehr. 
a  redemption,)  between  my  people  and  thy  people.""^  Isaiah 
says,  "Thus  saith  the  Lord  your  Redeemer,  the  Holy  One  of 
"  Israel;  for  your  sake  I  have  sent  to  Babylon,  and  have 
"  brouglit  down  all  their  nobles  and  the  Chaldeans  whose  cry 
« is  in  the  ships."  "  For  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God,  the  Holy 
«  One  of  Israel,  thy  Saviour.  I  gave  Egypt  for  thy  ransom, 
«  Ethiopia  and  Seba  for  tliee.  Since  thou  wast  precious  in 
**  my  sight,  thou  hast  been  honourable,  and  I  have  loved  thee; 
"  therefore  will  I  give  men  for  thee,  and  people  for  thy  life."e 

•  Ex.  15.13.  b  Ex.  8.  23. 

9  lia.  43.  3.  14.        See  Jamieson's  Sacred  Historj'. 


151 

Tliis  love  of  God  to  Israel  caused  liim  so  to  redeem  them,  that 
this  redemption  served  as  a  division  or  distinction  between 
them  and  oilier  nations.  It  is  so  pecuiiar  that  other  nations, 
witli  their  men  and  people,  are  said  to  be  given  for  the  ran- 
mm  of  the  Israelites. 

In  \  Cor.  5  :  7,  Paul  plainly  alludes  to  the  Old  Testament 
history,  in  such  a  way  as  to  shew  us  what  he  meant  by  say- 
ing that  **  Christ  died  for  our  sins  according  to  the  Scrip- 
"tuies."  "For  even  Christ  our  Passover  is  sacrificed  for 
'*  us."  This  is  our  Passover,  the  Passover  of  us ;  which  us 
he  speakes  of  in  the  next  verse  as  keeping  the  ordinance 
"  witii  the  unleavened  bread  of  sincerity  and  truth,"  and  as 
differing  very  widely  from  some  who  had  the  old  leaven  of 
malice  and  wickedness,  like  the  Egyptians  of  old,  between 
whom  and  the  Israelites,  God  niade  the  typical  Passover  a  re- 
demption or  mark  of  distinction.  He  said  to  Moses,  *'  It  is 
'•  the  Lord's  passover.  For  I  will  pass  through  the  land  of 
'*  Egypt  this  night,  and  will  smite  all  the  first  born  in  the 
*'land  of  Egyt,  both  man  and  beast:  and  against  all  the 
"  Gods  of  Egypt  I  will  execute  judgment.  I  am  the  Lord. 
"  And  the  blood  shall  be  to  you  for  a  token  upon  the  houses 
"  where  you  are:  and  when  1  see  the  blood,  I  will  pass  over 
"you,  and  the  plague  shall  not  be  upon  you,  to  destroy  you, 
"  when  I  smite  the  land  of  Egypt.'' »  For  whom  was  this 
typical  passover  sacrificed  ?  Was  it  for  all  men  universally? 
It  was  for  the  Israelites  alone,  to  the  exclusion  of  those  stub- 
born foes  who  sank  to  the  bottom  of  the  Red  Sea.  For 
whom  is  Christ  our  antitypical  Passover  sacrificed  ?  For 
whose  sins  did  he  die  according  to  the  scriptures  ?  For  the 
spiritual  Israel  who  believe  in  his  name,  and  not  for  those 
incorrigible  enemies,  who  sink,  in  just  judgment,  to  the  bot- 
tomless pit. 

The  next  passage  which  claims  our  attention  is  Dan.  9: 
24.  "  Seventy  weeks  are  determined  upon  thy  people,  and 
"  upon  thy  Holy  City,  to  finish  the  transgression,  and  to 
'*  make  an  end  of  sins,  &c."  Its  being  said  here  that  the 
Messiah  comes  to  finish  transgression,  and  to  make  an  end 
of  sins,  is  considered  evidence  of  universal  salvation,  be- 
cause there  can  be  no  state  of  eternal  sin  and  misery,  after 
all  transgression  and  sin  shall  have  been  finished  and  brought 
to  an  end.  But  according  to  their  explanation,  this  text 
not  only  proves  that  there  will  be  no  sin  nor  punishment  af- 

a  Ex.12.  11—13. 


152 

fcr  death,  but  that  there  has  been  no  sin  nor  pjinishtneiit 
for  near  two  thousand  years  past;  for  it  was  then  that 
the  Messiah  came  and  fulfilled  this  prophecy.  The  word 
here  translated  finish^  is,  in  one  of  the  Psalms,h  correctly 
rendered  refrain*  "  I  have  refrained  my  feet  from  every 
"  evil  way,  that  I  might  keep  thy  word."  My  oi)poiient 
himself  will  admit  that  David  did  not  mean  that  he  had 
Jinislied  his  feet  by  annihilation,  or  that  he  had  obtained  a 
perfect  deliverance  from  sin  and  sorrow  in  this  life.  In 
other  places  a  it  is  rendered  stay  or  restrain.  *•  Therefore 
"  the  heaven  over  you  is  stayed  from  dew,  and  the  earth  is 
**  stayed  from  her  fruit."  "  So  the  people  wei*e  restrained 
"  from  bringing  work  for  the  offering  of  the  sanctuary." 
Would  my  opponent  understand  from  these  passages,  that 
the  heavens  and  the  earth  and  the  people  Vfevejinished  by  an- 
nihilation ?  Neither  did  the  Messiah  come  to  Jimsh  trans- 
gression in  this  sense,  but  to  restrain  it,  as  our  translators 
have  rendered  it  in  the  margin  of  the  text  under  considera- 
tion. What  is  meant  by  his  making  an  end  of  sins,  or  sin- 
off  eritigs  as  it  is  elsewhere  rendered,  ^  is  made  clear  in  the 
close  of  the  chapter,  where  it  is  said,  "  he  shall  cause  the 
**  sacrifice  and  the  oblation  to  cease."  These  typical  sins  or 
sin  offerings  were  of  no  farther  use,  after  God  had  '*  made  him 
**  who  knew  no  sin,  to  be  sin  or  a  sin  offering  for  us,  that  we 
"  might  be  made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him."  c  To 
say  that  he  made  an  end  of  sins,  so  that  no  sin  should  be  af- 
terward committed  or  punished,  is  not  only  contradicting  the 
scriptures,  but  contradicting  palpable  matter  of  fact,  d 

Other  passages  are  in  the  writings  of  John,  where  Christ 
is  represented  as  "  the  Lamb  of  God  which  taketh  away  the 
**sinof  the  world :"e  that  is  the  sins  of  believing  Gentiles; 
whereas  the  typica^  lamb  was  slain  for  Jews  only,  and 
that  not  to  cleanse  the  conscience.  In  this  sense  the  same 
wi'iter  tells  us  that "  the  Father  sent  the  Son  to  be  the  Sa- 
"  viour  of  the  world."f  Whether  this  embraced  stubborn 
unbelievers,  our  Saviour  himself  declares.  '*  For  God  so 
"  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that 
**  whosoever  believeth  on  him  should  not  perish,  but  have 
"everlasting  lifc."g  This  is  as  much  as  to  say  that  the 
Father  gave  the  son  to  die  for  those  who  should  believe. 

a  Ex.  36  6.      Hag.  1.  10.       d  See  Dr.  Wylie's  numbers  on  UniTersalisnii 
b  LeTit.  4.  3,  25.  29.  in  the  Presbyterian  Magariate. 

e  2  Cor.  5.  21.  e  John  1.  29. 

h  119.  101.  f  1  John  4.  li. 

g  John  3.  16; 


153 

A  few  passages  of  Paul's  writings  yet  remain,  which  con- 
tain the  same  doctrine.  One  rejiresents  God  as  the"  Saviouii 
of  all  men,  especially  of  those  that  believe.'^*  Tlus  shows  that 
there  is  a  salvation  poruliar  to  believers.  It  is  true,  God  is 
the  Saviour  of  unbelievers  who  forget  him  :  but  he  is  only 
their  Saviour  from  temporal  calamities,  such  as  the  bondage 
in  Egypt.  Tlie  Psalmist  ^  says  that  tlie  idolatrous  Israelites 
"forgat  God  their  Saviour,  which  had  done  great  things  in 
Egypt"  But  although  God  saved  them  from  the  tyranny  of 
Pharaoh,  he  says  concerning  some  of  them,  «  so  I  sware  in 
my  wrath,  they  shall  not  enter  into  my  rest"  «  And  to 
♦*whom  sware  he  that  they  should  not  enter  into  his  rest,  but 
''to  them  that  6«/i!«?;erf  not.'  So  we  see  that  they  could  not 
enter  in  because  of  unbelief:'  c  Although  they  had  harden- 
ed their  hearts  through  the  deceitfulness  of  sin.  God  was 
still  theii-  Saviour,  Deliverer,  Preserver.  But  in  the  same 
sense,  the  Psalmist  says,  "  Lord  thou  savest  man  and  beast"d 
This  is  a  literal  translation  of  the  original  and  the  Septua- 
gint  Although  God  was  the  Saviour  of  the  godly  and  un- 
godly, believers  and  unbelievers,  Paul  makes  a  great  distinc- 
tion between  them.  He  says,  concerning  those  who  believed 
the  gospel,  "  there  remaineth,  therefore,  a  rest  to  the  people 
of  God  :"  Whereas  "  they  to  whom  it  was  first  preached,  en- 
tered not  in  because  of  unbelief. "e  This  is  a  comment  upon 
the  same  Apostle's  declaration  that  "  God  is  the  Saviour  of 
all  men,  especially  of  those  that  believe."  But  we  have  a  simi- 
lar comment  in  the  context  of  the  passage  itself:  where  he 
says  "  godliness  is  profitable  unto  all  things,  having  promise 
of  the  life  that  now  is,  and  of  that  which  is  to  come."  Thus 
God  is  the  Saviour  or  preserver  of  all  men  in  this  life,  but  es- 
pecially of  those  that  believe,  because  they  are  preserved  and 
blessed  forever. 

The  context  will  also  explain  the  general  expressions  used 
in  1  Cor.  15:  22.  "For  as  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ 
shall  all  be  made  alive."  The  next  verse  says,  "  But  every 
man  in  his  own  order :  Christ  the  first-fruits,-  afterward  they 
that  are  Christ's  at  his  coming."  The  all  that  are  made  alive 
in  Christ  are  here  said  to  be  "  i\\iiy  that  are  Christ's,"  that 
is,  all  who  belong  to  Clirist  Now  does  not  the  same  Apos- 
tle tell  us  that  none  belong  to  Christ  but  those  who  have  his 
Spirit?  "Now  if  any  man  have  no^'ie  Spirit  of  Christ  he  is 

a  1  Tim.  4.  10.  d  36.  6. 

b  106. 21.  eHeb.*:6.9. 

0  Hebr.  3;  11. 18.  19. 


154 

none  of  his.*'"  Although  tliere  is  to  be  hereafter  a  general  ef- 
fusion of  the  Spirit,  it  is  so  far  from  bein.s;  universal  in  ali 
ages,  that  some  Avho  liaA  e  enjoyed  its  miraculous  gifts,  and 
who  have  even  been  personal  acquaintances  and  profess- 
ed disciples  of  Christ,  shall  be  pronounced  none  of  his. 
^'  And  then  will  I  profess  unto  them,  I  never  knew  you :  depart 
**  from  me,  ye  that  work  iniquity."i>  As,  therefore,  the  work- 
ers of  iniquity,  who  are  destitute  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  do 
not  belong  to  him,  and  never  did,  they  shall  not  be  made  alive 
in  him ;  wherefore  the  word  all  must  here  be  understood  ia 
the  sense  which  is  limited  by  the  subject  to  which  it  is  applied. 
The  meaning  of  the  passage  is  simply  this.  "  As  in  Adam  ali 
[that  belong  to  Adam]  die,  so  in  Christ,  all  [that  belong  t« 
Christ]  shall  be  made  alive." 

The  last  passage  to  be  noticed  inthelatter  part  ofRom.  5, 
in  which  it  is  said  that  "  the  free  gift  came  upon  ali  me* 
"  unto  justification  of  life,"  and  "  by  the  obedience  of  one 
"shall  many  be  made  righteous."  We  have  already  seem 
that  the  word  all  is  often  used  for  a  part  of  mankind,  and 
the  younger  Edwards  <i  has  proved,  in  opposition  to  Dr. 
Chauncy,  that  the  same  thing  may  be  said  of  the  word  many, 
cThe  whole  chapter  shews  that  these  a// mew  who  receive 
justification  of  life,  and  these  many  who  are  made  rigliteouSf 
are  justified  and  made  righteous  through  faith.  The  chap- 
ter begins,  "  Therefore  being  justified  by  faith,  we  have 
"  peace  with  God,  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  ,•  by  whom 
"  also  we  have  access  by  faith  into  this  grace  wherein  wc 
"  stand,  and  rejoice  in  hope  of  the  glory  of  God."  He  lets 
us  know  that  these  all  men  are  the  same  pious  us  of  which  he 
speaks  so  often.  Besides  that  faith  and  hope  already  at- 
tributed to  them,  he  says  in  verse  5th,  **  the  love  of  God  is 
"shed  abroad  in  our  hearts  by  the  Holy  Ghost  which  is  give» 
unto  ws."  In  verse  4th,  they  have  patience  and  experience. 
In  verse  1 0,  they  are  reconciled  to  God.  No  wonder  then, 
tliat  in  verse  17,  they  are  said  to  have  "  abundance  of  grace 
"  and  of  the  gift  of  righteousness."  Are  all  men  universal- 
ly patient  and  experienced  christians  ?  have  all  men  faith 
hope,  and  love  ?  Are  all  universally  reconciled  to  God  ?  la 
the  Holy  Ghost  given  to  all  men  ?  Not  so.  But  let  it  be  re- 
membered that  Paul  says  in  this  same  epistle,  "if  any  man 
*'  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his."  Christ 
himself  has  declared  that  lie  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damn- 

kRorn.  8.  9.  e  i*  trt^^ti        d  Of  his  writines  and  hig  iktber's*  fret  «•• 

b  Matt  7:  23.  is  made  ia  this  diicatwon. 


155 

ed,  and  that  his  enemies,  who  love  him  not,  shall  be  slain  he- 
fore  him.  Surely  if  all  men  universally  enjoyed  jus^t/ica- 
Hon  unto  life,  our  infallible  judge  would  not  condemn*  some 
to  be  slain. 

What  makes  it  evident  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt,  that 
these  all  men  are  believers,  is,  that  the  1 8th  verse,  in  which 
they  are  said  to  be  justified,  is  inti-oduced  by  therefore,  as  an 
express  inference  from  the  irth,  in  which  they  are   said  to 
receive  a6wnrf«Mce  of  grace,  as  well  as  tiie  gift  of  righteous- 
ness :  and  in  verse  2nd  they  are  said  to  *'  have  access  by 
^  faith  into  this  grace.'*''     His  promises  in  verse  17th  are  con- 
cerning believers,  and  are  therefore  particular.     This  calls 
for  a  particular  and  not  an  universal  conclusion.     As  he 
does  not  draw  any  of  those  lame  conclusions  of  which  my  op- 
ponent's friends  and  the  enemies  of  God  accuse  him,  his  in- 
ference in  verse  18th  must  be  confined  to  believers,  which 
were  contemplated  in  the  promises.     And  Dr.  Chauncy's 
fear  that  this  interpretation  would  confound  the  antithesis 
maintained  from  verse  12th  to  the  close,  is  entirely  without 
foundation,  as  his  great  antagonist  has  shown.     Is  there  no 
antithesis  in  saying  that  as  the  world  of  sinners  transgressed 
and  died  in  the  first  Adam  their  federal  head,  so  the  world  of 
believers  are  justified  and  saved  in  the  second  Adam,  their 
federal  Head  ?     This  is  the  doctrine  of  the  chapter,  of  the 
epistle,  and  of  the  scriptures. 

The  argument  from  the  extent  of  Christ's  atonement  is 
considered  the  citadel  of  Universalism.  The  result  of  the 
examination  which  it  has  now  received  is,  that  there  are  some 
who  are  not  profited  by  Christ's  atonement,  but  must  be 
sent  to  prison  until  they  satisfy  for  themselves,  which  they 
can  never  do.  Many  plain  authorities  have  been  advanced, 
which  shew  that  Christ  died  exclusively  for  those  who  shall 
be  saved ;  for  his  sheep  and  people,  brethren  and  friends, 
children  and  bride,  body  and  cliurch.  It  has  also  been  shewn 
by  the  context  of  Universalist  authorities  that  the  sacred 
writers  mean  believers,  even  where  they  use  such  general  ex- 
pressions as  many,  all,  every,  the  world,  and  the  whole  world, 
in  relation  to  this  subject.  We  conclude  therefore,  that  un- 
believers must  perish. 

In  the  course  of  this  discussion  my  opponent  has  been  re- 
presented as  an  enemy  to  the  Atonement.  The  word  occurs 
in  our  translation  of  Rom.  5:  11.  In  his  Lecture  on  this  pask 
sage,  he  says,  "  if  this  word  had  been  correctly  translated, 

a  The  meaning  of  the  word  damn. 


156 

**  the  word  afoncmenU  and  of  course  the  doctrine  of  atoae- 
**  ment,  as  it  is  now  understood,  would  not  have  been  found, 
"  (as  it  is  not  contained)  in  the  New  Testament,    Neitlicr  is 
"  the  doctrine  of  atonement,  i.  e.  in  the  sense  of  making  sa- 
*'  tisfaction  to  divine  justice,  by  the  means  of  a  suflering  vic- 
'*tim,  any  where  to  be  found  in  the  Bible."  Soon  after,  in  a 
note,  he  makes  a  similar  remark  concerning  "the commonly 
received  doctrine  of  atonement  by  vicarious  sufferings.''^  For 
farther  information,  he  refers  us  to  the  article  atonement^  in 
Priestley's  History  of  the  Conniptions  of  Christianity,  a  work 
which  he  earnestly  recommends  to  the  attention  of  liis  read- 
ers.    Of  this  work,  its  own  author  in  the  last  century,  pro- 
fessed to  give  a  compend  in  this  desk  ',  in  w  hich  he  says,   "  I 
*'  regard  w  ith  horror  such  doctrines  as  those  of  transubstan- 
*' tiation,  the  trinity,  atonement,  and  other  corruptiojis  of 
*'  Christianity.^^  Here  then,  is  the  consistency  of  my  opponent 
and  his  Universalist  and  Unitarian  friends.      They  quotie 
scripture  to  prove  their  point,  although  in  this  very  work  of 
Dr.  Priestley's,  recommended  earnestly  by  my  opponent, 
the    inspiration   of   the    Scriptures    is    as    unequivocally 
denied    as    in    Thomas    Paine's    Age   of   Reason.     They 
urce  an   argument  from  the  extent  of  Christ's  atonement, 
which  presupposes  his  >dcarious  satisfaction,    and  is  per- 
fectly nugatory  without  it;  yet  they  dare,   in  the  face  of 
high  heaven,  to  express  as  blasphemous  an  abhorrence  of  the 
atonement  and  its  author,  as  could  be  expected  from  devils 
incarnate,     Yet  this  is  the  man  who  calls  me  brother.b  After 
thus  impiously  insulting  my  Divine  Master,  he  gives  the 
sacred  name  of  brother  to  his  unworthy  servant.  Worthless 
as  I  am,  I  desire  no  such  confraternity.  **  O  my  soul!  come 
"  not  thou  into  their  secret ;  unto  their  assembly,  mine  honour 
be  not  thou  united." 

a  See  Lectures,  pp.  105.  106. 

b.  Minutes  p.  256.  "  But  my  brother, — yes,  I  say  my  brother,  though  he  ia  ity 
opponent  in  this  debate,— says  &e." 


PART  SECOND. 


Tlius  much  concisely  concerning  the  arguments  of  the  Uni- 
yei-salists.  My  own  evidence  for  the  Orthodox  opinion  may 
now  be  expected.  Preparatory  to  this,  allow  me  to  say  a  few 
things  concerning  the  true  statement  of  the  question,  and  the 
sources  frjom  which  tliis  evidence  shall  be  drawn.  Nothing  but 
the  subtlety  of  Universalist  writei-s  makes  it  necessary,  for- 
mally to  declare  that  these  sources  are  the  inspii-ed  oracles 
exclusively.  Mr.  Balfour  insinuates  that  we  consider  the  Bi- 
ble rather  scarce'  of  proof,  and  that  on  this  account,  we  resort 
to  uninspired  Jewish  authority.  The  doctrine  of  theTargums 
which  he  has  proved  to  be  on  our  side,  appears  to  grieve 
him.  He  also  shews  that  the  Apocrypha  which  Mr.  Winches- 
ter had  quoted  against  us,*  is  really  in  our  favour:  and  it  is 
Tery  remarkable  that  they  generally  denote  the  state  of  eter- 
nal torment  by  that  word  ^  w  hich  is  used  in  the  account  of  the 
rich  man  and  Lazarus.*'  Although  he  gives  us  Josephus  and 
Philo  also,  we  lay  but  little  stress  on  such  ^vrite^s,  in  doctrin- 
al matters.  If  however,  my  opponent  is  driven  to  the  hard  ne- 
cessity, of  resting  an  affair  of  criticism  upon  uninspired  Jew- 
ish authority,  it  would  surely  be  more  reasonable  to  resort 
to  them,  than  to  that  Hebrew  Professor  whom  he  is  so  often 
calling  upon  in  this  debate.  Instead  of  comparing  Spiritual 
things  with  Spii-itual,  and  determining  the  meaning  of  Scrip- 
ture words  by  scripture  usage,  he  is  perpetually  appealing  to 
my  fi'iend  the  learned  Professor,  an  uninspired  Hebrew,  for 
an  ultimate  decision  onthe  meaning  of  the  words  of  inspirar 
tion.    So  anxious  is  he  to  have  him  for  an  umpire  between  us, 

a  In  his  4th  Dialogue  he  quotes  Wisdom  xi.  23—26,  xii.  1,  2. 16.     xv.  1.  2. 
b  "JiJ  Hadei. 

e  2  Esdnis,  ii.  29      iy.  i.      Tiii.  53.    Tobit  xiii.  2.    Wisdom  xviL  14,     EccIbSi 
xji.  re.    n.  5,0.    Song  of  tfw  three  ehiltfrm,  verse  SB. 


158 

that  he  calls  upon  him  no  less  than  four  times  in  the  same  hall" 
hour.  In  the  last  of  these  instances  he  says,  **I  now  once  more 
*'  call  upon  my  opponent  to  submit  to  the  determination  of  this 
*•  point  depending  on  tlie  meaning  of  these  words  to  the  decision 
**  of  the  Professor,  and  if  he  will  not  consent,  I  appeal  to  the 
*•  Professor  myself,  or  to  any  other  con)petent  person  w  ho 
"  may  now  he  present,  to  tell  me  if  I  am  wrong.'^a  Thus 
my  opponent  who  unjustly  accuses  us  of  servile  regard  to 
human  autliority,  actually  goes  begging  for  some  Fatlier 
Confessor,  either  Jew  or  Gentile,  to  tell  him  whether  he  is 
right  or  wrong:  and  while  he  professes  not  to  know  wliat 
opinion  the  umpire  may  express,  he  promises  submission  to 
his  determination  in  matters  of  doctrine  and  criticism.  We 
might  as  well  decide  the  question  by  lot.  He  has  been  long 
challenging  the  clergy  "  to  discuss  this  important  subject 
with  him."  Is  this  decision  by  unknown  and  uninspired  ar- 
bitrators what  he  means  by  a  discussion  ?  In  ascertaining 
the  meaning  of  words,  we  should  look  for  higher  authority 
than  the  mere  assertion  of  any  man  living  ?  yet  in  an  affair  of 
this  sort,  my  opponent  gives  Dr.  Campbell  of  Aberdeen  and 
a  gentleman  of  this  city,  who  is  really  a  greater  man,  as 
paramount  authority.  Says  he  "  I  give  them  as  my  authori' 
*'ty  for  not  using  these  words  according  to  the  common  ac^ 
*'  ceptation."b  Ihcse  gentlemen  are  really  in  my  favour  ;  yet 
the  Bible  itself  is  my  authority. 

With  regard  to  the  christian  church  in  general,  and  in 
every  age,  my  opponent  is  much  more  modest  and  more  cor- 
rect. He  appears  to  know  that  his  system  has  never  been 
considered  a  part  of  their  religion,  In  his  article  on  the 
word  Universaiists,  in  the  spurious  edition  of  Buck's  Theo- 
logical Dictionary,  he  says,  "  The  sentiments  of  the  Univer- 
"  salists  were  embraced  by  Origen  in  the  third  century,  and  in 
"more  modern  times  by  Chevalier  Ramsay, Dr.  Cheyne,Mr. 
"  Hartley  and  others:"  Although  I  could  not,  with  Bishop 
Hoi*sley,  deny  Origen's  credibility  in  matters  of  fact,  the 
whole  Christian  world  will  admit  that  a  diminution  of  his 
heathenish  eccentricities,  would  have  been  a  great  addition 
to  his  Christian  character.  His  follies  were  many  :  yet  a 
total  denial  of  future  punishment,  a  doctrine  which  my  op- 
ponent has  borrowed  from  Mr.  Huntingdon,  and  which  he 
advocates  in  this  debate,  is  not  acknowledged  to  be  among 
the  articles  of  Origen's  creed.    The  above  extract  is,  how- 

a  Mioatei  pp.  161.  163.  164.3  isc. 
b  Mia«t«>  pp.  les.  179. 


ever,  an  indirect  confession  of  a  remarkable  fact,  that  Uni- 
versalisni  in  any  shape,  had  no  footing  whatever  in  the  church 
of  Christ,"until  Origen,  and  very  little  since  his  day.  Clemens 
Roinanus  who  probably  heard  some  of  the  Apostles  preach, 
says,  "  All  souls  are  immoi-tal,  even  those  of  the  impious  ;  to 
*V  whom  it  would  be  better  not  to  be  incorruptible.  For  as 
"they  are  punished  by  ine\tinguishable  hre,  with  an  eternal 
*•  punishment,  and  do  not  die,  they  can  obtain  no  end  to  their 
"  great  evil."  With  this  testimony  Justin  Martyr  and  Iren- 
aeus  agree.  When  Oi'igen  swerved  from  this  Scriptural  doc- 
trine, he  taught  that  the  wicked  were  subjected  to  an  eternal 
alternation  of  misery  and  happiness.  This  is  represented  by 
Augustine  as  one  of  Origen's  dogmas  which  the  church  did  not 
receive  ;  one  which  is  inexcusable  and  indefensible  ;  and  one 

which  is  to  be  VEHEMENTLY  ABHORRED  BY  EVERY  CHRIS- 
TIAN, WHETHER  LEARNED  OR  UNLEARNED.     As  his  OWn 

belief  and  that  of  the  scriptures  and  the  church,  he  tells  us, 
**  that  Christ  shall  appear  in  the  consummation  of  the  world, 
»*  to  judge  it,  and  that  he  will  raise  all  the  dead,  and  will 
^*  give  to  pious  men  eternal  life  and  perpetual  joys  ;  but  will 
"condemn  impious  men  and  devils,  that  they  may  bepunisk- 
*•  ed  without  end."  He  shortly  adds ;  **  and  we  condemn 
*'  the  Origenists,  who  pretended  that  there  will  be  an  end  of 
the  future  punishment  of  condemned  men  and  devils:"*  From 
the  time  of  Christ  to  the  present  day,  this  doctrine  of  Augus- 
tine has  been  the  creed  of  all  Christendom,  w  ith  the  exception 
of  Hobbes,  Spinosa,  Priestley,  and  Huntingdon,  with  tliose 
Atheists,  Deists,  Unitarians,  and  Universalists  who  choose 
txj  follow  them. 

Among  their  devoted  followers  my  opponent  occupies,  at 
present,  a  conspicuous  station.  He  has  debated  and  lectured, 
preached  and  pi'inted  largely  in  their  defence.  For  his  pub- 
lications he  claims  murh  of  your  esteem,  because  as  he  has 
told  you,  they  have  not  yet  been  censured,  although  sent  to  all 
tlie  Universities  and  Colleges  in  the  United  States,  foi-  their 
critical  examination,  and  respectfully  submitted  to  the  whole 
body  of  \merican  clergy  of  every  sect  and  denomination. 
He  forgot  to  tell  you  that  be  had  requested  them  to  pay  the 
postage  of  their  remarks.  Their  refusirig  to  do  this,  he  takes 
for  a  certificate  of  approbation.  This  is  quite  an  easy  way 
of  becoming  famous.     It  must  be  because  my  opponent  is 

»  See  Lampft's  Philelojico — theological  Dissertation  on  Uie  Eternity  of  PiinisU* 
ment. 


160 

extraordinarily  modest,  or  because  he  is  saturated  ^ith  apr 
j)lause,  tliat  he  has  not  procured  the  same  renown  among  the 
ck'rgy  and  the  colleges  of  Europe.  And  if  refusing  to  write 
remarks  upon  every  trifle,  and  transmit  them  by  mail  at 
their  own  expense,  be  considei'ed  a  favourable  attestation, 
there  is  no  doubt  that  Captain  Simms's  Lectures  on  the  prac- 
ticability and  importance  of  penetrating  to  the  centre  of  our 
globe  through  a  supposed  opening  at  the  north  pole,  might 
soon  receive  the  respectful,  though  silent  approbation  of  all 
the  literary  and  ecclesiastical  establishments  on  the  surface 
of  the  earth,  and  even  of  those  interior  regions  which  he 
wishes  to  explore. 

But  how  comes  it  to  pass,  that  after  having  vauntingly 
submitted  his  books  to  unlimited  investigation,  and  chal- 
lenged all  America  to  discuss  with  him  the  subjects  of  whick 
they  treat; — how  comes  it  to  pass  that  after  these  steps,  my 
opponent  should  object  to  my  noticing  these  very  books,  in  a 
debate  which  arose  from  the  acceptance  of  his  challenge  ? 
You  have  heard  him  make  bitter  complaints  of  my  referring 
to  those  works  which  he  has  brought  into  question  :  and  al- 
though he  has  heretofore  boasted  that  they  contained  an  un- 
answered and  an  unanswerable  defence  of  that  doctrine  which 
he  here  advocates,  he  has  now  become  so  much  asliamed  of 
them  as  openly  and  repeatedly  to  declare  in  your  hearing, 
that "  they  have  no  bearing  upon  the  point  whatever.*'  Again, 
he  says,  '*  Now  I  would  ask,  what  has  the  writings  of  your 
"  speakei"  to  do  with  the  question  before  us  for  discussion?"* 
What  strange  literary  phenomena  must  these  books  be  !  !  A 
Universalist  Version^  or  to  speak  more  properly,  a  Universal- 
ist  Perversioft  of  the  New  Testament,  adoined  with  Unita- 
rian notes,  and  yet  having  nothing  to  do  with  the  Universalist 
question  now  under  discussion  !  "  A  series  of  Lectures  on  the 
"  Doctrine  of  Universal  Benevolence,  delivered  in  the  Uni- 
<*  versalist  Church,"  by  a  Universalist  preacher,  and  yet  they 
have  no  bearing  on  the  point  now  in  hand  !  It  is  not  wonder- 
ful that  he  should  deny  the  bearing  of  my  arguments  :  It  is 
natural  enough  for  such  a  character  to  deny  that  even  the 
case  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus  has  any  relation  to  the 
question  :  But  must  he  not  have  incurred  a  doleful  dizzines* 
in  the  dust  of  debate,  before  he  could  say  this  of  his  own  ela- 
borate and  boasted  productions,  which  were  written  professed- 
ly in  defence  of  Universalism  ?  If,  however,  his  report  be 

a  Mintitef,  pp.  &7.  K. 


m 

t*ue,  that  his  works  on  Universalism  say  nothing  to  the  poiut, 
it  is  easy  to  account  for  the  silence  of  the  Ainoncan  literatim 
Witii  the  exception  of  a  few  Unitarian  establishments,  wliich 
are  in  the  habit  of  dealing  in  such  wares,  no  College  to  wiiom 
the}  were  sent,  would  think  theni  worth  the  postage. 

Worthless  as  they  are,  I  shall  still  take  such  notice  of  them 
as  r  would  of  the  works  of  Dr.  Priestley,  Thomas  Paine,  or 
any  other  infidel      They  all  bear  testimony  against  their 
authors.     Although  my  opponent,  in  den)  ing  the  inspiration 
of  certain  books  of  Scripture,  endeavours  to  sliield  himself 
under  the  name  of  Dr.  Lardner  and  the  Improved  Version, 
any  person  of  understanding,  who  reads  his  quotations  from 
them  in  his  New  Testament,  will  see  t!iat  he  is  responsible 
for  the  sentiments  there  expressed.     Although  he  has,  of  his 
own  motion,  in  your  presence,  taken  an  awful  oath  *'  before 
that  God  who  is  the  searcher  of  all  liearts,"  that  he  maintains 
an  "  unbounded  faitli  in  the  volume   of  Revelation,"^     he 
still  adheres  to  that  earnest  recommendation  which  his  Lec- 
tures give  of  that  work  of  Dr.  Priestley,  in  which  the  inspira- 
tion of  that  volume  is  denied  in  the  roundest  terms.  How  can 
these  two  things  be  reconciled  ?  It  is  only  a  less  learned  and 
a  less  witty  Voltaire,  taking  tlie  sacramental  obligation  of 
the  Lord's  Supper.     When,  in  the  call  of  Providence,  I  have 
rowed  an  adherence  to  the  Scriptures,  it  was  done  sincerely. 
Whether,  therefore,  in  tliis  debate,  I  quote  my  opj)onent  or 
any  other  writer,  on  either  side,  I  shall  still  treat  the  Bible, 
with  the  whole  of  its  sacred  contents,  as  the  only  infallible- 
rule  of  faith  and  practice. 

It  is  of  importance  to  have  well  defined  views  of  the  real 
question  to  be  supported  by  such  authority.  In  this  respect 
justice  is  seldom  done  to  the  orthodox.  "  Is  the  punishment 
*' of  the  wjc^erf  absolutely  eternal  ?"  Instead  of  this  ques- 
tion about  the  punishment  of  the  wicked,  my  opponent  would 
persuade  you  that  I  have  undertaken  to  prove  that  the  grea^ 
ter  part  of  the  universe  will  be  destroyed.  His  words  are 
the  following,  viz.  «  But  my  opponent  would  have  you  be- 
**  lieve  that  the  adversary,  or  devil,  if  you  please,  that  goeth 
"  about  as  a  roaring  lion,  is  heir  to  most  of  the  creatures 
"  whom  God  hath  made."  In  another  instance  he  would  in- 
sinuate that,  according  to  my  doctrine,  God  will  "  doom  the 
"  greater  poi-tionof  his  helpless  offspring  to  never  ending  tor- 
**  ment"  •»    I  have  never  promised  nor  attempted  to  prere 

a  Minutes  p.  76. 

b  Minutes  pp,  123.  179. 

w 


162 

such  a  thing.  My  object  is  to  prove  that  God  will  doom  tlie 
wicked  to  eternal  torment.  If  these  einhrace  tlje  greater 
part  or  the  whole  of  his  ci'eation  *'  though  hand  join  in  hand, 
*' the  wicked  shall  not  be  unpunished."'  But  what  evidence 
have  I,  or  what  evidence  has  my  opponent  that  this  charac- 
ter w  ill  fit "  the  most  of  tl>e  creatures  w  hom  God  hath  made  ?" 
Doeseitlier  of  us  know  what  proportion  of  the  angelic  throng 
fell  from  the  happiness  of  heaven?  Can  either  of  us  tell 
what  proportion  of  the  human  race  shall  be  regenerated  and 
saved  through  Jesus  Christ  ?  Thus  far  it  is  true,  "  many  be 
"  called  but  few  chosen  :"  but  when  we  consider  the  vast  ac- 
cession which  the  church  is  to  receive  from  tlie  incalculable 
population  and  the  general  piety  of  the  millenial  day,  we 
know  not  that  the  wicked  shall  bear  a  greater  proportion  to 
the  righteous,  that  our  convicts  in  prison  do  to  the  citizens 
at  large.  "And  I  belield,  and  I  heard  the  voice  of  many 
"  angels  round  about  the  throne,  and  the  beasts  and  the  elders: 
"  and  the  number  of  them  was  ten  thousand  times  ten  thous- 
*'and,  and  thousands  of  thousands.'*  "After  this  I  beheld, 
"  and  lo  !  a  great  multitude  which  no  man  could  number,  of 
"all  nations,  and  kindreds,  and  people  and  tongues,  stood 
"  before  the  throne,  and  before  the  Lamb,  clothed  w  ith  white 
**  robes  and  palms  in  their  hands ;  and  cried  with  a  loud 
"  voice,  saying  salvation  to  our  God,  which  sittethupon  the 
*'^throne,  and  unto  the  lamb."  a 

The  question  is  not  whether  we  wish  all  men  saved,  or 
whether  we  hate  the  wicked,  or  love  sin,  but  whether  God 
has  determined  that  incorrigible  sinners  shall  be  eternally 
punished.  Yet  Mr.  Ballou  would  charge  the  orthodox  with 
the  above  evils.  While  charitably  representing  them  as  the 
Prodigal's  elder  brother,  as  the  "  grumbling"  labourers  who 
bore  the  heat  and  burthen  of  the  day,  and  as  the  murmuring 
Scribes  and  Pliarisees,  he  asks,  "  Is  it  hard  to  see  that  my 
"opponent  lias  made  a  very  fair  and  full  profession  of  his 
"  love  to  sin  in  room  of  his  love  to  God ;  and  a  strong 
"  desire  to  injure  his  fellow  men,  in  room  of  serving  them  in 
*'  love  ?"  **  At  what  do  my  opposers  rage  ?  At  what  are 
"  they  dissatisfied  ?  Not  because  I  exclude  them  from  any 
**  privilege  or  blessing  of  the  gospel.  What  then  ?  I  am 
"  sorry  to  name  it  It  is  because  I  extend  those  blessings 
**  farther,  and  liope  they  w  ill  do  more  good  than  what  suits 
"them!"b    To  this  it  may  be  answered  that  Universalism 

ft  Rev.  5;  11,  7;  9,10.  b  On  Atonement  pp.  223,  224. 


163 

is  an  attempt  to  exclude  us  from  the  truth,  which  is  an  essen- 
tial privilege  and  blessing  of  the  gospel.  Without  rage,  we 
are  dissatisfied  at  this  attempt.  We  hate  falsehood  and  ini- 
quity ;  and,  through  grace,  we  love  God  and  our  fellow 
creatures.  Labours  foi'  the  general  dilfusion  of  {gospel  bles- 
sings are  certainly  one  mai'k  of  this  love.  The  ortliodox 
have  been  enabled  to  do  something  in  this  way.  But  Mr. 
Ballou  says,  "I  extend  those  blessings  farther." 
Vain  man  !  What  has  he  ever  done  for  the  extension  of  the 
Redeemer's  kingdom  ?  Does  he  suppose  that  his  mere  word 
can  raise  the  dead  ?  Oi'  that  his  pen  can  wi-ite  their  names 
in  the  book  of  life  ?  And  yet  the  arrogant  asgumption  of 
these  prerogatives  of  Heaven,  is  the  amount  of  Universalist 
exertions  for  the  salvation  of  sinners.  While,  for  this  pur- 
pose, tlie  Orthodox  risk  every  expense  and  danger,  and  are 
instrumental  in  saving  millions,  not  only  in  word  but  in  deed, 
their  enemies  deride  their  pious  labours,  and  continue  crying 
peace  peace,  when  there  is  no  peace.  They  deny  our  moral 
malady,  and  of  course  will  not  apply  the  remedy.  "  The 
•*  whole  head  is  sick  and  the  whole  heart  faint  From  the 
^'  sole  of  tlie  foot  even  unto  the  head,  there  is  no  soundness 
*'  in  it ;  but  wounds  and  bruises  and  putrifying  sores :  they 
*'  have  not  been  closed,  neither  bound  up,  neither  mollified. 
**  with  ointment."  The  Orthodox  see  mankind  to  be  in  this 
condition,  and,  like  the  good  Samaritan,  they  endeavour  to 
apply  the  oil  and  the  wine.  For  this  service  of  love,  they  are 
reviled  and  opposed  by  the  whole  Iscariot  band.  Yet  these 
Universalist  and  Unitarian  priests  and  Levites,  who  passed 
by  on  the  other  side,  boast  of  tlieir  superior  skill,  industry, 
and  success  in  the  healing  art.  After  they  have,  in  their 
own  conceit,  banished  all  disease  from  the  earth,  by  a  blast 
of  their  nostrils,  and,  with  a  dash  of  their  pen,  pronounced 
all  men  perfectly  sound,  they  flap  their  triumphant  wings, 
and  proclaim  to  the  world,  "  We  extend  the  blessings  of 
**  health  farther  than  it  suits  the  good  Samaritan  to  do." 
There  is  no  better  way  of  answering  such  empty  and  invidi- 
ous boasting,  than  in  the  words  of  Job.  a  "  But  ye  are  forgery 
**  of  lies,  ye  are  all  physicians  of  no  value." 

While  \i  suits  the  lovers  of  truth  to  preach  the  gospel  to 
every  creature,  saying,  "  he  that  believeth  and  is  baptized 
^*  shall  be  saved,"  itsmVsthem  to  say  moreover,  "he  thatbe- 
"lieveth  not  shall  be  damned."  And  it  is  this  unbeliever, 
one  who  lives  and  dies  in  a  state  of  corruption  and  coiiUem- 

a  J3;  4.  h  p.  58. 


164 

nation,  that  is  meant  by  tlie  wicked,  in  the  question  now  un- 
der discussion.  "  Is  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  absolute- 
*'  \y  eternal  ?  or  is  it  only  a  temporal  punishment  in  this 
'•  w  orld,  for  their  good,  and  to  be  succeeded  by  eternal  hap- 
••  piness  after  deatli  ?"  It  has  already  been  shewn  that  these 
two  pi'opositions  exhibit  the  two  sides  of  one  and  the  same 
question.  The  latter  clause,  which  was  designed  to  present 
the  negativ  e  of  the  main  question  in  a  peculiar  form,  my  op- 
ponent has  undertaken  to  support.  In  his  4th  Lecture,'*  he 
says,  *' My  evidence  will  be  derived  from  two  sources :  first 
"  from  the  law  of  reason ;  and  secondly ,  from  the  law  of  the 
••scriptures."  To  shew  you  how  perfectly  unnecessary  it  is 
to  meet  him  on  the  ground  of  reason,  I  will  give  you  only 
one  instance  of  his  skill  in  this  way,  where  he  has  made  sad 
work  of  the  attributes  of  God,  as  well  as  of  the  human  consti- 
tution. The  follow  ing  are  his  own  words,  viz.  "  In  a  Phi- 
"  losophical  sense,  there  is  not  full  power,  so  long  as  the  ef- 
"  feet  is  not  produced ;  for  all  that  we  know  of  power  is  by 
"the  effect."'*  It  is  easy  to  see  that  this  principle  would 
prove  not  only  our  own  inability  to  procure,  but  the  inabili- 
ty of  the  Creator  to  bestow,  any  blessing,  cerporealor  spiri- 
tual, temporal  or  eternal,  which  has  not  already  been  ob- 
tained.    And  this  he  calls  philosophy  ! 

CONFIRMATION. 

To  prove  that  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  is  absolutely 
eternal,  my  evidences  shall  be  brought  from  the  word  of  God. 
The  importance  of  the  subject  and  the  necessity  of  giving  it 
a  candid  and  devout  attention  have  already  been  urged.  My 
proofs  shall  be  given  under  five  heads.  1.  This  doctrine 
shall  be  fairly  inferred  from  the  scriptural  account  of  the 
attributes  of  God,  and  the  character  and  condition  of  man- 
kind. 2.  Several  scripture  texts  shall  be  produced,  which, 
in  various  forms  of  expression,  imply  this  doctrine.  3.  It 
shall  be  shewn  that  the  scriptures  point  out  such  a  contrast 
between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked,  as  to  their  character, 
standing,  and  future  destiny,  as  can  be  satisfactorily  explain- 
ed, only  by  admitting  the  eternal  punishment  of  the  wicked. 
4.  Its  eternity  shall  be  proved  by  negative  expressions  of 
scripture,  in  which  its  termination  is  plainly  denied.  5.  It 
shall  be  proved  by  ])assages  of  scripture,  in  which  the  doc- 
trine is  affirmed.  Thus  you  have  my  division,  under  the  de- 
nominations of  inference,  implication,  contrast,  negation  and 

a  p.  85.  b  Presbvt— ra  verses  Presbyt— m,  p.  15. 


165 

affirmation.  These  terms,  ysed  for  convenience,  were  ikt 
best  that  I  could  procure.  The  two  first  appear  synonimous: 
though  it  will  be  found  that  the  first  is  a  deduction  from  ge- 
neral doctrines,  and  the  second  from  particular  figures  of 
expression. 

FIRST  ORTHODOX  ARGUMENT. 

INFERENCE. 

This  doctrine  shall  be  fairly  inferred  from  the  scriptural 
account  of  the  attributes  of  God,  and  the  character  and  con- 
dition of  mankind.  As  these  are  topics  to  whicli  both  parties 
resort,  the  impartial  consideration  of  the  divine  attributes, 
postponed  from  the  5th  Universalist  argument,  was  promis- 
ed in  this  place.  These  we  propose  to  treat  of  in  two  classes; 
which,  from  the  appearance  of  things,  and  for  distinction's 
sake,  we  will  call  the  milder  and  the  severer  attributes  of  God. 
The  various  subjects  embraced  under  this  first  argument, 
shall  with  divine  assistance,  be  considered  in  the  following 
order.  I.  God's  goodness,  love  mercy  and  grace,  2.  In 
connexion  with  these,  the  scriptural  plan  of  salvation.  3. 
God's  justice  and  righteousness,  holiness  and  truth.  4.  In 
connexion  with  these,  the  scriptural  account  of  sin.  5.  The 
helplessness  of  sinners.  6.  In  connexion  with  this,  the  scrip- 
tural account  of  the  character,  influence  and  dominion  of 
that  society  to  which  the  curse  has  exposed  and  Subjected 
them. 

I.  The  milder  attributes  of  God,  such  as  goodness,  love, 
mercy,  and  grace.  To  shew  what  we  are  to  expect  from 
these,  my  opponent  quotes  such  as  the  following  passages. 
"  For  great  is  thy  mercy  toward  me ;  and  thou  hast  deliver- 
ed my  soul  from  the  lowest  hell."  "  Tiiey  shall  abundantly 
'*  utter  the  memory  of  thy  great  goodness^  and  shall  sing  of 
"  thy  righteousness.  The  Lord  is  gracious,  and  full  of  com- 
"  passion;  slow  to  anger,  and  of  great  mercy.  The  Lord  is 
*'  good  to  all ;  and  his  tender  mercies  are  over  a/I  his  works.'* 
"  Thou  openest  thy  hand  and  satisfiest  the  desire  of  every 
"  living  thing."  "  That  ye  may  be  like  your  Father  which 
"is  in  Heaven ;  for  he  maketh  his  simto  rise  ontlie  evil  and 
"on  the  good,  and  sendeth  rain  on  the  just  and  unjust."*  On 
this  subject,  Mr.  Winchester,  in  his  Fourth  Dialogue,  asks 
his  friend  the  following  question.  "If  you  had  as  nnichpow- 
"  er  as  good  will,  would  you  not  bring  all  to  bow  tothescep- 
"tre  of  grace,  and  to  be  reconciled  to  God  through  Jesus 

a  Ps.  hcntTi,  13.     cxlv.  7.  8,  9, 16.    ?IaU.  v.  4.'.    Mintites  pp.  121,  17f>,lS(i. 


166 

••  Christ?"  In  order  to  prove  that  God's  goodness  will  im- 
part happiness  and  salvation  to  all  whom  he  knows  and 
governs,  that  is,  to  the  universe,  Mr.  Ballon  says,  "  If  God 
"be  inlinitely  good,  his  goodness  is  commensurate  with  his 
"  power  and  know  ledge ;  then  all  beings,  whom  his  power 
'*  produced,  are  the  objects  of  his  goodness ;  and  to  prove 
'•  that  any  being  w  as  destitute  of  it,  would  prove  that 
"  Deity's  knowledge  did  not  comprehend  such  being."* 

If  these  men  have  spoken  truly,  and  handled  the  Scriptures 
aright,  they  have  proved  several  very  strange  things! 

1.  As  we  are,  in  this,  as  well  as  in  the  future  world,  the  sub- 
ject of  God's  knowledge  and  power,  and  as  he  exercises  infi- 
nite goodness  toward  all  the  subjects  of  his  infinite  knowledge 
and  power,  therefore  we  must  enjoy  a  perfect  exemption  from 
all  pain,  and  the  full  satisfaction  of  all  our  desires,  in  this 
world  as  well  as  that  which  is  to  come  !  Men  who  can,  by 
so  plain  an  implication,  deny  the  suffering  condition  of  this 
groaning  and  travailing  creation,  under  the  omniscient  in- 
spection of  Almighty  God,  are  ready,  with  Berkeley,  to  deny 
the  existence  of  matter,  and  with  Hume,  to  deny  the  existence 
of  mind. 

2.  The  use  which  they  have  made  of  Matt.  v.  45,  shews 
that  they  do  not  think  faith  and  holiness  necessary  to  our  ac- 
ceptance with  God  ;  but  that  he  is  equally  favourable  to  the 
evil  and  the  good,  the  just  and  the  unjust,  not  only  in  sending 
temporal  blessings,  such  as  the  sun  and  the  rain,  but  in  be- 
stowing salvation.  That  this  doctrine  does  encourage  sin- 
ners to  live  in  unbelief,  and  in  the  exercise  of  the  most  awful 
presumption,  cannot  be  concealed  from  the  knowledge  of 
Universalists  themselves.  Here  we  need  not  recount  facta 
which  have  occurred  in  our  own  country,  or  in  this  city.  We 
shall  be  satisfied  with  one  which  came  under  Mr.  Winches- 
ter's own  observation.  In  his  Fifth  Dialogue  he  says,  *'  A 
"  Reverend  Divine^  whom  I  knew,  (living  not  long  since)  had 
"  encouraged  this  wickedly  presumptuous  disposition,  so  far 
**  as  openly  to  say,  God  cannot  damn  me ;  he  can  as  soon  cease 
"  to  be  God,  as  he  can  cast  me  off',  even  thoutjh  1  should  sin 
"ever  so  much.  If  I  should  kill  a  man,  he  could  not  damn  me  ; 
"  nay  if  I  should  kill  all  the  men  in  the  world,  he  cannot  damn 
"me.''*  Although  Mr.  Winchester  had  taught  that  God's 
good  will  and  power  were  commensurate  in  their  applica- 
tion ; — the  very  doctrine  which  the  above  blasphemer  ap- 
plied to  his  own  case;  his  eai's  are  so  stuniied  by  the  hissings 

«  On  Atonement  p.  182. 


1()7 

•f  his  own  brood,  that  he  is  obliged  to  condemn  and  expose 
the  fruit  of  his  own  labours.  He  says,  "At  length  the  dis- 
"  pleasure  of  the  Almighty  coming  visibly  upon  him,  this 
•'rhapsodist  changed  his  tone,  and  exclaimed  that  God  had 
^forsook  him  !"  He  then  proceeds  to  "  advise  all  men  of  that 
*♦  bold,  presuming,  self  confident  spirit,  to  read  and  consider 
«  well  those  words  in  Jer,xxii.  24.  *  As  1  live,  saith  Jehovah, 
"  though  Coniah,  the  son  of  Jelioiakim,  King  of  Judah,were 
« the  signet  upon  my  right  hand  -,  yet  would  I  pluck  thee 
'•thence.'  " 

3.  If  the  principles  and  authorities  advanced  by  my  oppo- 
nent, and  Messrs.  Winchester  and  Ballou  are  relevant,  they 
not  only  prove  the  present  and  eternal  salvation  and  uninter- 
rupted happiness  of  men  and  devils,  believers  and  unbelievers, 
but  of  the  irrational  creation  universally.  They  quote  Ps. 
cxlv.  16.  "  Thou  openest  thy  hand,  and  satisfiest  the  desire 
of  every  living  thing,"  By  this  passage  I  understand  that  the 
daily  provisions  of  the  young  lion,  the  raven,  and  the  spar- 
row come  from  God,  and  that  not  one  of  these  creatures  falls 
to  the  ground  without  his  knowledge.  But  many  do  fall  to 
the  ground  and  perish,  with  their  desires  satisfied  or  unsatis- 
fied. So  Providence  sends  all  the  comforts  which  men  enjoy, 
yet  many  die  because  their  wants  are  not  supplied,  and  many 
perish  forever  because  their  wicked  desires  are  satisfied. 
"  For  the  wicked  boasteth  of  his  heart's  desire,  and  blessetll 
"  the  covetous,  whom  the  Lord  abhorreth."  '*  So  they  did  eat, 
«  and  were  well  filled ;  for  he  gave  them  their  own  desire  : 
"  they  were  not  estranged  from  their  lust.  But  while  their 
"  meat  was  yet  in  their  mouths,  the  wrath  of  God  came  up- 
"  on  them,  and  slew  the  fattest  of  them,  and  smote  down  the 
"  chosen  men  of  Israel."  '*  And  he  gave  them  their  request, 
<•  but  sent  leanness  into  their  souls."  "The  desire  of  the 
*'  wicked  shall  perish.''^ 

The  view  which  the  Orthodox  give  of  the  attributes  of 
God  is  reasonable  and  scriptural.  They  never  pretend  to 
measure  the  perfections  of  God  by  the  objects  upon  which 
they  are  exercised  ;  for  if  they  were,  they  must  either  find 
an  infinite  creation,  or  a  finite  Creator.  Are  the  milder  at- 
tributes of  God  less  than  infinite,  because  he  has  pronounced 
and  inflicted  a  curse  upon  the  inferior  creation  in  conse- 
quence of  Adam's  fall  ?  Are  these  perfections  diminished 
because  '<man  is  born  unto  trouble  as  the  sparks  fly  up- 
ward ?"  God  foreknew,  foretold,  and  brought  to  pass  the 

a  Pb.  X.  3.  IxxTiii.  5J9.    eyi.  15.    Cxii.  10. 


168 

destrnction  of  Jenisalem  ;  in  which  tender  mothers  wer£ 
impelled  by  the  phrenzy  of  ifMsa^iv/iW  hunger,  to  eat  the  de- 
sire of  their  eyes.  Did  these  sufferings,  or  did  the  ineffable 
anguish  of  the  Divine  Redeemer,  when  bearing  the  curse  due 
to  our  offences,  tarnish  the  infinite  lustre  of  tlie  divine  good- 
ness ?  As  infinite  power  has  created  a  finite  universe,  so  has 
infinite  sovereignty  made  a  limited  application  of  divine 
mercy. 

That  this  application  of  mercy  is  more  limited  than  our 
finite  creation,  will  ap])ear  from  plain  declarations  of  Holy 
W  rit.  She  season  of  its  exercise  is  there  spoken  of  as  a 
time  of  light,  a  day  of  graee,  of  salvation  and  of  visi- 
tation, of  God's  presence,  to  open  the  eyes  of  sin- 
ners, and  make  their  hearts  tender  and  fruitful.  The  ex- 
press limitations  of  this  season  of  mercy  may  now  be  given 
in  the  following  particulars. 

J.  Die  scriptures  speak  of  a  time  of  light,  which,  with  re- 
gard to  some,  lasts  for  a  limited  period,  and  is  followed  by 
darkness.  "  Then  Jesus  said  unto  them,  yet  a  little  while 
"  is  the  light  with  you.  Walk  while  ye  have  the  light,  lest 
*'  darkness  come  upon  you  ;  for  he  that  walketh  in  darkness, 
"knoweth  not  whither  he  goeth.  While  ye  have  the  light, 
"believe  in  the  light,  that  ye  may  be  children  of  light,  "a 

2.  There  is  a  limited  day  of  grace,  after  which  sinners  are 
hardened.  "  Wherefore  as  the  Holy  Ghost  saith,  to  day  if 
"  ye  will  hear  his  voice,  harden  not  your  hearts,  as  in  the 
"  provocation,  in  the  day  of  temptation,  in  the  wilderness.^' 
"But  exhort  one  another  daily,  while  it  is  called  to  day; 
"  lest  any  of  you  be  hardened  through  the  deceitfulness  of 
"  sin."b 

3.  God  has  ordained  an  accepted  time,  and  appointed  a 
limited  day  of  salvation  and  of  visitation.  '*  Thus  saith  the 
*'  Lord,  in  an  acceptable  time  have  I  heard  thee,  and  in  a  day 
"  of  salvation  have  I  helped  thee.*'  "  For  he  saith.  I  have 
"heard  thee  in  a  time  accepted,  and  in  the  day  of  salvation 
"  have  I  succoured  thee :  Belmld  !  now  is  the  accepted  time, 
**  behold  now  is  the  day  of  salvation."  "And  when  he  was 
**  come  near,  he  beheld  the  city,  and  wept  over  it :  saying,  if 
"  thou  hadst  known,  even  thou,  at  least  in  this  thy  day,  the 
**  things  which  belong  unto  thy  peace!  but  now  they  are  hid 
**  from  thine  eyes.  For  the  days  shall  come  upon  thee,  that 
**  thine  enemies  shall  cast  a  trench  about  thee,  and  compass 

a  John  Mi.  3i  38-.  b  H«br.  iii.  7,  8,  f  S". 


169 

*'  thee  round,  and  keep  thee  iir>  on  every  side,  and  shall  lay 
«  thee  even  with  the  giound,  and  thy  children  within  thee; 
«  and  they  shall  not  leave  in  thee  one  stone  upon  another  ; 
"because  thou  knewest  not  the  time  of  thy  visiiutlonP 
"Seek  ye  the  Lord  while  he  may  be  iotmd,  call  ye  upou 
"  him  wliile  he  is  near."  "  For  this, shall  every  one  that  is 
*•  godly,  pray  unto  thee  in  a  time  when  thou  mayest  be  found. 
"Surely  in  the  floods  of  great  waters  they  sliall  not  come 
*'  nigh  unto  iiim:"  "  Then  shall  they  call  upon  me,  but  I 
"  will  not  answer  ;  they  shall  seek  me  early,  but  they  shall 
^'  not  find  me-"^ 

4.  'I'here  is  a  time  when  those  who  walk  in  the  darkness 
ef  depravity,  and  harden  their  hearts,  and  blind  their  eyes, 
and  refuse  to  se^k  the  Lord,  or  call  upon  his  name,  shall,  like 
barren  trees,  be  cut  down,  and  cast  into  the  fire,  and  thus  de- 
prived forever  of  that   mercy    which    tliey  here  despised. 
*'  Then  said  he  unto  the  dresser  of  his  vineyard,  behold  !  these 
*•  three  years  \  come  seeking  fruit  on  this  fig-tree,  and  finding 
"  none  :  cut  it  down;  why  cumbereth  it  the  ground  ?"  "  And 
"  now  also,  the  axe  is  laid  unto  the  root  of  the  trees  ;  therefore 
"  every  tree  which  bringeth  not  forth  good  fruit,  is  hewn 
*•  down,  and  cast  into  the  fire."   And  there  w^e  are  plainly 
told  they  shall  lie,  and  never  be  able  to  rise  again.  *'  If  the 
"  tree  fall  tow  ard  the  south  or  toward  the  north ;  in  the  place 
«  where  the  tree  falleth,  there  it  shall  be."  "  There  are  the 
"  workers  of  iniquity  fallen  :  they  are  cast  down,  and  shall 
"  not  be  able  to  rise."  *'  Because  1  have  called,  and  ye  refus- 
"ed;  I  have  stretched  out  my  hand,  and  no  man  regarded; 
"  but  ye  have  set  at  nought  all  my  counsel,  and  would  none  of 
**  my  reproof :  I  also  w  ill  laugh  at  your  calamity  :   I  will 
"  mock  when  your  fear  cometh  :  When  your  fear  cometh  as 
"  desolation,  and  your  destruction  cometh  as  a  whirlwind  ; 
"  when  distress  and  anguish  cometh  upon  you :  Then  shall 
"  they  chI!  upon  me,  but  I  will  not  answ^cr;  they  shall  seek 
**me  eariy,hut  they  shall  not  find  me  :  for  that  they  hated 
"  knowledge,  and  did  not  choose  the  fear  of  the  Lord  :  They 
"would  none  of  my  counsel:  they  despised  all  my  reproof: 
"  Therefore  shall  they  eat  of  the  fr'iit  of  their  ow  n  w  ay,  and 
"  be  filled  with  their  own  devices :  For  tlie  turning  aw  ay  of 
"  the  simple  shall  slay  them,  a^^d  the  pros])crity  of  fools  shall 
*^  destroy  them."    >Ve  need  hardly  mention  that  Paul  calls 
this,  being  "punished  ^xih.  everlasting  destruction,''^^  Thus 

a  Isa.  xlix.  8.    2  Cor.  Ti.2.    Luke  xix.  41 — 44.    Isa.  Iv.  6.  Ps.  xxxii.  6.  ProT. 
i.  28. 
b  Luke  xiij.  7.  Matt.  iii.  lO.Eccles.xi.  3.  Ps.  36. 12.1ProT.  i.  24—32.  2  Thess.  \.  % 

X 


17© 

shall  stubborn    unbelievers  have  judgment  without  mer- 
cy. 

II.  Having  shewn  that  the  eternal  punislmient  of  the  wick- 
ed is  faiily  interred  from  scriptural  limitations  of  divine  mer- 
cy to  those  who  embrace  this  mercy  by  faith,  (a  doctrine  which 
has,  in  one  shape  or  another  occupied  our  time  from  tbe  com- 
mencement of  tliis  debate,)  much  bas,  of  course  been  antici- 
pated, in  proof  that  the  scriptural  plan  of  salvation  infers  the 
eternal  punislmient  of  incori'igible  offenders.  God  has  shewn 
plainly  the  channel  through  wbich  exclusively  liis  salvation 
is  conveyed  to  lost  siuners.  It  is  tlirough  the  love  of  God, 
the  mediation  of  Christ,  the  operations  of  his  Spirit,  the  dis- 
pensations of  his  Providence,  the  revelation  of  his  will,  and 
u  corresponding  subjugation  of  our  will  to  his.  All  who  arc 
saved,  must,  according  to  tbe  scriptures,  be  saved  in  this  way. 
That  there  are  some  sinners  wbo  are  not  saved  in  this  way, 
and  must,  of  course,  be  eternally  lost,  may  be  concisely  shewm 
by  an  induction  of  particulars. 

1.  The  love  of  God.  B'rom  what  was  said  above,  of  God's 
milder  attributes,  such  as  his  goodness,  love,  mercy,  and 
grace,  it  appears,  that  there  are  some  whose  day  of  ligbt  and 
grace,  of  \asitation  and  salvation,  shall  be  succeeded  by  dark- 
ness and  despair,  banisbment  and  everlasting  destruction.  It 
was  proved  that  they  sliould  have  judgment  without  mercy, 
and  divine  wrath  instead  of  love.  Before  Rebecca's  chil- 
dren were  yet  born,  or  had  done  good  or  evil,  God  said 
"  Jacob  have  I  loved,  but  Esau  have  I  hated."  »  Their  lives 
corresponded  with  their  respective  destinies  :  and  there  is  not 
an  iota  of  evidence  that  God's  love  shall  ever  be  withdrawn 
from  pious  Jacob,  or  his  hatred  removed  from  wicked  Esau. 
"What  shall  we  say  then?  Is  there  unrighteousness  with 
"  God  ?  God  forbid.  For  he  saith  to  Moses,  I  will  have 
'*  mercy  on  whom  I  will  have  mercy,  and  I  will  have  com- 
**  passion  on  whom  I  will  have  compassion."  There  are 
thousands  who  are  so  much  engaged  in  making  laws  for  their 
Creator,  and  passing  judgment  upon  his  actions,  that  they 
fall  short  of  that  repentance  to  which  his  goodness  might 
otherwise  lead  them.  "  Desj)isest  thou  the  riches  of  his 
"goodness  and  forbearance  and  long  suffering;  not  knowing 
'•that  the  goodness  of  God  leadeth  thee  to  repentance  ?  but 
"  after  thy  hardness,  and  impenitent  heart,  treasurest  up 
"  unto  thyself,  w  ratli  against  the  day  of  wrath,  and  revela- 

a  R««i.  9;  !»— 1 5. 


171 

*•  tion  of  the  righteous  judgment  of  God,  who  will  render  tp 
*'  every  man  according  to  his  deeds."a 

2.  The  mediation  of  Clirist.  In  what  was  said  of  Christ's 
offices,  under  the  8th,  9th,  and  loth  Universalist  ai-giiments, 
it  was  proved  that  althougli  he  was  the  light  of  the  world, 
there  were  some  who  loved  daikness  rather  than  light,  and 
who  should  be  cast  into  the  blackness  of  darkness  forever, 

that  although  he  was  the  universal  sovereign,  some  of  hi» 

subjects  would  continue  rebellious,  and  should  be  slain  be- 
fore liim ; and  that  although  he  was  a  successful  High 

Priest  for  Jews  and  Gentiles,  without  respect  of  persons,  it 
was  only  for  those  among  them  who  feared  God  and  wrought 
righteousness,  only  for  those  whom  the  Father  had  given 
him.  For  the  lost  part  of  mankind  he  refuses  to  pray.  Nay, 
he  prays  against  Judas,  and  his  spiritual  children  who  have 
since  canonized  that  Avdx  Traitor.  "  Add  iniquity  unto 
"  their  iniquity,  and  let  them  not  come  into  thy  righteousness. 
*'Let  them  be  blotted  out  of  the  book  of  the  living,  and  not  be 
"  written  with  the  rigliteous."  "  Set  thou  a  wicked  man 
**  over  him,  aiul  let  Satan  stand  at  his  right  hand.  When  ho 
"shall  be  judged,  let  him  be  condemned,  and  let  his  prayer 
"  become  sin."  "  Let  there  be  none  to  extend  mercy  unto 
**  him  ;  neither  let  tliere  be  any  to  favour  his  fatherless  chil- 
**dren.*'  *'  Let  this  be  the  reward  of  mine  adversaries  from 
"the  Lord,  and  of  them  that  speak  evil  against  my  soul." 
These  are  the  words  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  and  these  ar« 
the  scriptures  which  were  fulfilled,  when  the  son  of  i>erdition 
went  to  his  own  place.  ^ 

3.  The  operations  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  "  If  ye  live  after 
"  the  flesh,  ye  shall  die :  but  if  ye,  through  the  Spirit  do  mor- 
••'  tify  the  deeds  of  the  body,  ye  shall  live.  For  as  many  as 
'*  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  they  are  the  Sons  of  God." 
**  Now  if  any  man  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none 
"  of  his."  "Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit, 
"  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God."  But  there  are 
some  concerning  whom  God  has  said,  "  My  Spirit  shall  not 
*' always  strive  with  man."  "But  they  rebelled  and  vexed 
**  his  Holy  Spirit :  Therefore  he  was  turned  to  be  their  ene- 
'*  my,  and  he  fought  against  them."  *•  Whosoever  speaketh 
"  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not  be  forgiven  him, 
*'  neither  in  this  world,  neither  in  the  world  to  come."c 

Vi  Rom.  2:  4 — 11, 

b  John  17;  12.    Acts  1;  16—20,25.    Ps.  69;  27,28.  L09:  6—20. 
«  Rom.  viiL  13.  14.  9',    John  jii.  5.    Ge».  yl  3.    Isa.  Ixffi.  19.    Matt,  xii.  32, 


172 

4.  The  dispensations  of  Providence.  "All  things  work 
*'  together  for  good  to  them  that  love  God,  to  them  who  are 
*'  the  called  according  to  his  purpose."  In  the  reception  of 
sanctified  mercies  and  sanctified  afllictions,  they  glow  in 
knowledge,  grace,  and  usefulness.  That  it  is  not  so  with 
the  wicked,  is  attested  by  those  who  have  seen  them  in  pros- 
perity and  adversity.  "  I  was  envious  at  the  foolish,  when 
"  I  saw  the  prosperity  of  the  wicked.  For  there  are  no 
"  bands  in  tlieir  <leath  ;  hut  their  strength  is  firm.  They 
"  are  not  in  trouble  as  other  men  :  neither  are  they  plagued 
"  like  other  men.  Therefore  pride  compasseth  them  about 
"  as  a  charm  :  violence  covereth  them  as  a  garment.  Their 
"eyes  standout  with  fatness;  they  have  more  than  heart 
"could  wish.  They  are  corrupt,  and  speak  wickedly  con- 
"  cerning  oppression  ;  they  speak  loftily.  They  set  their 
*•  mouth  against  the  heavens,  and  their  tongue  walketh 
"through  the  earth."  "They  shall  fret  themselves,  and  curse 
"  their  King  and  their  God,  and  look  upward."  "  And  men 
*'  were  scoi'ched  with  great  heat,  and  blasphemed  the  name 
"of  God,  which  hath  power  over  these  plagues  :  and  they 
"  repented  not  to  give  him  glory.  And  the  fifth  angel 
*•  poured  out  his  vial  upon  the  the  seat  of  the  bea.st;  and  his 
"  kingdom  was  full  of  darkness  ;  and  they  gnawed  their 
*'  tongues  fur  pain  ;  and  blasphemed  the  God  of  Heaven  be- 
"  cause  of  their  pains  and  their  sores,  and  repented  not  of 
« their  deeds.'"^ 

5.  The  revelation  of  the  will  of  God.  "This  is  life  eter- 
*'  nal;  that  they  might  know  thee  the  only  true  God,  and 
*'  Jesus  Chiist  whom  thou  has  sent."  "  By  his  knowledge 
**  [by  the  knowledge  of  him,]  shall  my  righteous  servant 
••Justify  many."  *'  The  law  of  the  Lord  is  perfect,  convert- 
**  ing  the  soul :  the  testimony  of  the  Lord  is  sure,  making 
"  wise  the  simple  :  the  statutes  of  the  Lord  are  right,  rejoic- 
••  ing  the  heart:  the  commandment  of  the  Lord  is  pure,  en- 
*' lightening  the  eyes."  "  Wherewithal  shall  a  young  man 
*•  cleanse  his  way  ?  By  taking  heed  thereto,  according  to 
«'  thy  word."  "  From  a  child,  thou  hast  known  the  Holy 
'*  Scriptures,  which  are  able  to  make  thee  wise  unto  salva- 
"  tion,  through  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus.  All  .scrip- 
"ture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God,  and  is  profitable  for 
<'  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction  in 
"righteousness  :  that  the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect,  tho- 
«  rfjughly  furnished  unto  all  good  works."  "  Behold  the  days 

b  Bom.  viii.  28.    Ps.  Ixxiii.  3—9.    Isa.  Tiii.  21.    Rev.  xri.  9— U . 


173 

'•  come,  saith  the  Lord  God,  that  I  will  send  a  famine  in 
"  the  lan<l ;  not  a  famine  of  bread,  nor  a  thirst  for  water, 
"  but  of  liearing  the  words  of  the  Lord;  and  they  shall  wan- 
*'  der  from  sea  to  sea,  and  from  the  north  even  to  the  east, 
"  they  shall  run  to  and  fro,  to  seek  the  word  of  the  Lord, 
•'  and*  shall  not  find  it."  '♦  And  the  word  of  the  Lord  was 
•^precious  in  tliose  daysj  there  was  no  open  vision." 
••  Where  there  is  no  vision  the  peoi)le  perish  ;  but  he  tliat 
**keepeth  the  law,  happy  is  he  "'^  These  authorities  shew 
that  in  the  salvation  of  sinners,  the  scriptures  are  an  im- 
portant and  necessary  means,  of  which  many  are  left  desti- 
tute in  divine  sovereignty,  and  without  which,  divine  justice 
permits  many  to  perish. 

6.  The  subjection  of  the  heart  to  the  law  of  Christ.  "  Kiss 
"the  Son,  lest  he  be  angry,  and  ye  perish  from  the  way, 
"wlienhis  wrath  is  kindled  but  a  little."  "Except  ye  r-e- 
*' pent,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish."  "Except  a  man  be 
"  born  again,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God."  "  Hethat 
"  believeth  not  is  condemned  already  "—shall  be  condemn- 
ed at  the  day  of  judgment;— and  "shall  go  away  into  ever- 
lasting punishment."  In  relation  to  this  subject  we  might 
quote  all  that  the  Scriptures  say  of  the  necessity  of  regene- 
ration, repentance,  and  faith  ;  justification,  adoption  and 
sanctification.  Yet  how  many  are  there,  who,  instead  of  re- 
ceiving Christ's  yoke  which  is  easy,  and  his  burthen  which  is 
light,  have  "sent  a  message  after  him,  saying,  we  will  not 
"  have  this  man  to  reign  over  us  !"  Iiow  many  still  retain  that 
temper  "  which  is  not  subject  to  the  law  of  God  neither 
"indeed  can  be!'*  Concerning  every  such  character,  the 
Judge  has  declared  that  he  *'  will  appoint  him  his  portion 
"  among  unbelievers.'''* 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  above  six  pai-ticulars  all  con- 
verge in  the  cross  of  Christ.  "Neither  is  there  salvation  in 
"any  other:  for  there  is  none  other  name  under  heaven 
"  given  among  men,  whereby  we  must  be  saved."c 
The  love  of  God  sent  a  Saviour,  who  willingly  undertook  the 
mediatorial  work.  The  Spirit  and  Providence  and  word  of 
God  present  and  convey  a  Saviour ;  and,  blessed  be  God,  the 
hearts  of  his  people,  through  grace,  receive  a  Saviour.  That 
there  are  many  who  forever  reject  this  salvation,  cannot  rea- 

aJohnxvii.  3.  Isa.liiin.  Ps.xix.  7.  8.  II.  ix.  9.  S  Tina.  iii.  15— 17.  Amos 
■riii.  11.  12.     1  Sam.  iij.  1.     Prov.  xxix.  18. 

b  Ps.  ii.  13.  Luke  xiii.  S.  John  iiL  S.  II.  Mati.  xxT.4l.  4fi.  Luke  xis.  U. 
Bom.  riii.  7.    Luke  xfi.  46. 

e  Aati  IT.  13. 


174 

sonably  be  denied,  and  is  in  fact  admitted  by  Winchester 
himself.  Theii'  salvation  then  is  an  efiect  without  a  cause. 
They  have  no  interest  in  the  love  of  God,  which  is  the  procur- 
ing cause  of  salvation  ; — in  the  mediation  of  Christ,  which  is 
tlie  meritorious  cause ; — in  the  gi'ace  of  his  Spirit  w  hich  is 
the  ethcacious  cause ; — no  improvement  under  his  providence, 
which  is  the  accidental  cause; — nor  under  his  word,  %\hich 
is  the  instrumental  cause  on  the  part  of  God  ;  nor  do  they 
exei  cise  that  saving  faith,  out  of  a  new  heaii,  wliich  is  the 
instrumental  cause  on  the  pai't  of  man.^  Now,  accoid- 
ing  to  the  Scriptures,  these  are  the  only  possible  causes  of 
salvation.—  But  there  are  confessedly  some  on  wliom  they  do 
not,  and  never  shall  oj)erate.  Therefore,  there  are  some  wlio 
never  shall  enjoy  that  salvation  which  is  the  efi'ect  of  these 
causes. 

It  was  asserted  above,  that  Mr.  Winchester  admits  the 
minor  proposition  of  the  syllogism  just  now  repeated;  that 
there  ai'e  many,  who  forever  reject  this  salvation.  This  was 
said  on  the  authority  of  the  Rev.  Elisha  Andrews,b  who  quotes 
from  his  works  tlie  follow  ing  words,  viz.  "They  who  lived 
*•  and  died  in  rebellion  against  God,  will  be  eternally  depri- 
"  ved  of  the  glories  and  honours  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ." 
As  he  advocated  a  limited  punishment  in  the  future  w  orld,  it 
is  his  well-known  sentiment  that  some  have  lived  and  died  in 
rebellion  aguinsl  God,  and  "  will  be  condemned  in  the  day  of 
judgment  and  punished  in  the  lake  of  fire.'"^  To  the  same 
amount  Mr.  Andrews**  quotes  another  passage  from  Mr. 
Winchester,  in  tlie  following  words,  viz.  "  The  sin  against 
"  the  Holy  Ghost  is  an  offence  of  that  kind,  that,  either  ow  ing 
**  to  its  uncommon  malignity,  as  is  most  likely,  or  some  other 
"  cause,  exposes  the  guilty  person  to  tlie  age  of  judgment  from 
**  which  he  cannot  escape  by  repentance,  pardon,  and  sprink- 
**  ling  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  as  other  sinners  may."  Thus 
does  Mr.  Winchester  admit  that  there  are  some  sinners  who 
are  "  eternally  deprived  of  the  glories  and  honors  of  the 
**  kingdom  of  Christ"  and  "  cannot  escape  by  repentance, 
*'  pardon,  and  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Christ."  Those 
who  believe  that  there  is  no  salvation  in  any  other,^  will 
conclude  that  these  sinners  can  never  be  saved. 

Mr.  Winchester  has  generally  passed  himself  off  for  a  firm 

a  See  Lampe's  Philologico-th«ologieal  Dissertation  on  the  Eternity  of  Punish- 
meRtB.     Part  1.  Section  31. 

b  See  his  Candid  Kxamination  of  the  Moral  Tendency  of  the  Doctrine  of  Ulu- 
versal  Salvation,  as  taught  by  its  advoeates,  p.  78. 

•  Dialogue  5tt).  d   p.  77.  e  AcU  4  :  13v 


17$ 

believer  in  the  divinity  and  atonement  of  Christ.  l!fiilcss 
these  professions  were  swelling  words  of  vanity,  he  must 
have  considered  him  not  only  the  Saviour  of  minor  offenders, 
but  of  the  most  desperate  transgressors  that  shall  ever  se€! 
heaven.  Yet  how  diffirent  is  the  representation  given  in 
the  above  extracts !  Does  he  believe  that  some  who  are 
saved,  shall  nevertheless  be  "  eternally  deprived  of  the  glories 
*^  and  honors  of  the  kimjdom  of  Christ  ?"  Is  it  because  Christ 
will  frown  upon  any  of  his  own  purchase?  No;  but  be- 
cause their  sins  are  of  such  "  uncommon  maligniti/^'  that  tliey 
*'  cannot  escape  by  repentance,  pardon,  and  sprinkling  of  the 
"  blood  of  Christ.'*  He  would  have  us  believe  that  there 
are  sins  of  too  deep  a  dye  to  be  w ashed  away  in  that  blood 
"  that  speaketh  better  things  than  that  of  Abel."  He  would 
persuade  us  that  Christ,  whom  God,  Jiath  "  exalted  witii  his 
"  right  hand,  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour,  for  to  give  repen- 
"  tance  to  Isi'ael,  and  forgiveness  of  sins,"  cannot  impart 
**  repentance  and  pardon"  to  such  gross  offenders.  They 
must  therefore  perish  forever,  or  find  a  Saviour  whose  blood 
can  cleanse  them  from  sins  of  such  "  uncommon  malignity." 
Who  this  transcendant  Saviour  is,  will  appear  from  the  fol- 
lowing extract  from  the  same  author,  and  througli  the  same 
channel*  viz.  "  As  they  have  lived  and  died  in  sin,  their 
*'  destruction  or  misery  is  certain,  and  there  is  no  remedy 
*'  that  can  prevent  their  experiencing  the  consequences  of  their 
**  crimes,  and  suffering  the  just  punishment  which  shall  be 
"  inflicted  upon  them,  according  to  their  different  deserts.^* 
From  the  pen  of  a  christian,  this  language  would  evidently 
convey  the  doctrine  of  eternal  punisliment.  This  was  far 
from  Mr.  Winchester's  meaning.  He  is  here  speaking  of 
persons  whom  he  vainly  expects  to  reach  heaven  at  last,  tjp- 
on  what  ground  ?  Because  Christ  suffered,  the  just  for  the 
unjust  1  No  5  they  cannot  escape  by  the  sprinkling  of  the 
blood  of  Christ ;  this  will  not  do  for  sins  of  such  uncommon 
malignity  !  How  then  would  Mr.  Winchester  save  them  ? 
He  would  have  them  save  themselves,  by  meeting  the  de- 
mands of  the  law  in  their  own  persons,  and  "  suffering  the 
"just  punishment  which  shall  be  inflicted  upon  them,  accor- 
"ding  to  their  different  deserts."  One  would  suppose  that 
it  is  not  now  difficult  to  tell  what  Mr.  Winchester  means  by 
saying  that  such  a  man  will  be  eternally  deprived  of  tlie  glo- 
ries of  Christ's  kingdom.  Would  that  man  who,  after  com- 
mitting crimes  of  uncommon  malignity,  had,  in  his  own  per- 

*  Andrews  p.  74. 


176 

sou,  breasted  the  storm  of  divine  vengeance,  and  made  fuH 
satisfaction  to  the  law  of  God.  without  any  need  of  repen- 
tance, pardon,  or  vicarious  sutferings; would  that  man 

be  satisfied  with  tlie  glory  of  a  Saviour  whose  blood  was  in- 
adequate to  an  atonement  m  hich  he  had  effected  in  his  own 
person  ?  Is  it  not  easy  to  see  that  he  would  assume  as  great 
a  pre-eminence  over  the  church  and  its  Divine  Head  in  th« 
other  world,  as  such  cliaracters  generally  do  in  this  world  ? 
Such  is  the  profane  conteuipt  which  Universalism,  even  in 
the  hands  of  thisspecious  impostor,  throws  upon  the  only  Re- 
deemer of  lost  sinners. 

III.  The  several  attributes  of  God,  such  as  his  justice  and 
righteousness,  holiness  and  trutli.  On  these  subjects  I  shall 
give  plain  scripture  authority,  which  goes  to  shew  that  these 
attributes  of  God  require  the  punishment;  and  the  eternal 
punishment  of  the  wicked.  "And  they  cried  with  aloud 
•*  voice,  saying,  how  long,  0  Lord  Holy  and  1'ruk  !  dost 
**thou  not  judge  and  avenge  our  blood  on  them  that  dwell 
"  on  the  earth  ?"  *•  And  the  third  angel  poured  out  his  vial 
"  upon  the  rivers  and  fountains  of  water,  and  they  became 
"  blood.  And  I  heard  the  angel  of  the  waters  say,  thou  art 
"RIGHTEOUS,  O  Lord!  which  art  and  wast  and  shalt  be, 
"  because  thou  hast  judged  thus.  For  they  have  shed  the 
"blood  of  saints  and  prophets,  and  thou  hast  given  them 
"  blood  to  drink ;  for  they  arc  worthy:''  "  And  after  these 
**  things,  I  heard  a  great  voice  of  much  people  in  heaven,  say- 
"ing,  Alleluia!  Salvation,  and  glory,  and  honor,  and  pow'er 
"  unto  the  Lord  our  God :  for  true  and  righteous  are  his 
^'judytnents:  for  he  hiith  judged  the  great  whore,  which  did 
**  cori-upt  the  earth  with  her  fornication,  and  hath  avenged 
"  tlie  blood  of  his  servants  at  her  hand.  And  again  they  said, 
"  Alleluia  I  and  her  smoke  rose  up  for  ever  and  ever  J^  '"  See- 
ding it  is  a  RIGHTEOUS  thing  with  God.  to  recom])cnse  trl- 
"  bulation  to  them  that  trouble  you ;  and  to  yo(j  who  are 
"  troubled,  rest  with  us,  w  lien  the  Lord  Jesus  sliall  be  re- 
"  vealed  from  heaven,  with  liis  mighty  angels,  in  flaming  lire, 
*' taking  vengeance  on  them  that  know  not  God,  and  tliat 
**ohey  not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Chri=!t ;  who  shall 
*'*  be  punished  witfi  everlasriny  destruction  from  the  presence 
"  of  the  Lord,  and  from  the  glory  of  his  power;  when  he 
«  shall  come  to  be  glorified  in  his  saints,  and  to  be  admired 
"  in  all  them  that  believe,  (because  our  testimony  among  yon 
"  was  believed,) in  that  day."* 

«  RcT.  6;  10.  IC;  4—6,  19:  1—3.    2Thesi.  1;  G— 10. 


177 

In  these  passages  God  is  said  to  judge  i\w  wicked, — his 
decisions  are  caWQdjudf/menls  ; — • — they  arc  Haul  to  be  pro- 
nounced in  that  day,  when  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  ret  eai'ed 

from  heaven  xviih  his  mighty  angels ; the  punishment  is 

everlasting  exen  forever  and  ever; — it  is  inflicted  because  the 
wicked  are  tvorthy  according  to  the  strict  principles  of  jus- 
tice;— because  it  is  a  righteous  thing  with  God  to  recomj)ense 
tribulation  to  them ; — because  God  is  the  *•  Lord  Holy  and 
**  True,"  and  *•'  True  and  Righteous  are  his  judgments.'''' 
These  authorities  shew  tliat  divine  jws/fc«  and  trutii  require 
the  everlasting  punishment  of  tlie  wicked,  and  that  their  he- 
being  imprisoned  until  they  pay  the  uttermost  farthing  of 
their  debt,  in  a  confinement  to  an  absolute  eternity.  They 
prove  that  those  avIio  have  vainly  depended  on  their  own  suf- 
ferings to  make  satisfaction  to  justice,  will  be  awfully  disap- 
pointed ;  and  it  has  already  been  shown  in  the  two  foregoing 
heads,  that  it  will  be  then  too  late  to  escape  through  the  vi- 
carious satisfaction  of  Christ. 

Butthere  is  another  way  of  trying  to  evade  the  force  of  this 
argument.  Lanipe,  in  his  "  Dissertation  on  the  Eternity  of 
"  Punishments,"  =*  tells  us  of  certain  characters  "who  admit 
"  that  God  has  threatened  those  punishments  in  his  word, 
"  although,  as  Supreme  Legislator,  he  is  at  liberty  to  dis- 
"  pense  with  the  execution,  and  to  grant  some  mitigation, 
"  though  unknown  to  us.  That  there  were  some,  even  in 
"  Chrysostom's  time,  who  held  this  sentiment,  I  gather  from 
"  his  Homily  on  the  resurrection.  *  How,'  says  he,  *  shall  I 
"  persuade  y<ni  ?  When  I  say  their  worm  shall  not  die,  their 
"  fire  shall  not  be  quenched  ;  Mdien  I  say  they  shall  go 
"  into  eternal  fire  ;  when  I  set  before  yon  the  rich  voluptua- 
"  ry  now  wailing  in  the  flames,  you  say,  these  are  only  threats. 
'*  This  is  the  satanical  doctrine  i>  which  renders  the  grace 
"  given  to  you  useless,  and  makes  you  unfruitful.'  Of  the 
*'  same  stamp  were  those  of  whom  Augustine,  in  his  City  of 
"  God,  21:  24,  says,  '  This  holds  good  against  those,  who  in 
*'  pleading  their  owai  cause,  attempt,  under  pretence  of  great- 
"  er  compassion,  to  contravene  the  words  of  God,  asserting 
"that  tliey  are  true  only  in  as  far  as  theyshew  wliat^men  deserve 
"  to  suffer,  not  what  they  actually  shall  suffer.'  "  To  come 
nearer  home.  Dr.  Huntingdon  has  adopted  the  same  mode  of 
interpretation,  in  the  following  words,  viz.  "  That  the  wis- 
"  dom  of  God  saw  fit,  for  a  time,  to  leave  man  in  such  ignore 

a  Part  2  Sect.  8.  b  Satanicum  hoc  est  verbum. 


17» 

"  ranrc  and  darkness  of  mind,  that  he  should  mistake  that 
"  which  ^va.s  spoken  only  as  the  voice  of  justice,  for  a  decla- 
"  ratio)i  of  very  fact."  If  our  interpretation  be  a  mistake^ 
as  he  here  represents  it,  then  the  scriptures  do  not  reaily 
tiircaten  eternal  punishment,  hut  only  appear  to  <lo  it,  on  acr 
couat  of  our  •'  ignorance  and  darkness  of  mind."  AV  hat  shall 
we  tliinkthen,  when  Dr.  Huntingdon  himself  confesses  that 
this  is  no  vain  appearance,  hut  a  solid  reality.  The  follow- 
ing question  and  answer  are  in  his  own  words ;  viz.  *'  Now 
"  does  the  bible  plainly  say,  that  sinners  of  mankind  shall  be 
"  dannied  to  interminable  punishment  ?  It  certainly  does, 
**  as  plainly  as  language  can  express,  or  any  man,  or  even 
'*  God  himself  can  speak."  »  His  assertion  therefore,  that 
God  will  not  execute  a  threat  which  he  has  made,  "  asplain- 
*  ly  as  language  can  express,"  is  a  denial  of  his  truth ;  is  a 
contraveniion  of  the  words  of  God,  as  Augustine  represents 
it,  and  of  course,  a  satanical  doctrine,  as  Chrysostom  calls  it. 
It  (Reserves,  to  be  classed  with  those  rules  of  interpretation 
by  which  they  first  assert  that  the  language  is  parabolical, 
or  popular,  and  then  conclude  that  it  is  false. 

Among  the  many  cases  which  are  cited  against  the  vera- 
city of  heaven,  we  need  mention  only  two  which  appear  to 
be  chit  fly  relied  upon.  The  first  is  in  Gen.  ii:  17.  "  But  of 
"  the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  thou  shalt  not  cat 
*'  of  it :  for  in  the  day  that  thou  eatest  thereof,  thou  shalt 
*'  surely  die."  The  second  is  in  Jonah  iii.  4,  *'  And  Jonah 
•*  began  to  enter  into  the  city  a  day's  journey,  and  he  cried 
**  and  said,  yet  forty  days,  and  Nineveh  shall  be  overthrown." 
These  threatcnings,  it  is  declared,  never  were  executed,  and 
never  will  be,  either  in  the  actual  transgressors,  or  their 
Substitute  or  Surety.  "  The  argument,"  says  Lampe^  "  upon 
*•  whicli  they  chiefly  rest  their  opinion,  is  this  ;  that  threat- 
"  enings  do  not  produce  the  same  obligation  which  promises 
"  do:  since  he  who  threatens,  assumes  the  character  of  a  cre- 
"ditor,  whilst  he  against  whom  the  threat  is  denounced,  be- 
*'  comes  a  debtor.  On  the  contrary,  he  who  promises  be- 
"  comes  a  del)tor  to  him  to  whom  thfe  promise  is  made.  Now 
*'  it  is  perfectly  competent  to  a  creditor  to  remit  a  debt, 
*♦  whereas  a  debtor  is  bound  to  all  that  he  has  promised." 
This  theory  has  at  least,  as  much  evidence  in  Revelation,  as 
the  vortices  of  Cartesius  have  in  nature.  It  is  a  profane 
figment,  invented  to  account  for  that  which  was  not  under- 

a  Andrews  pp  32,  33. 
b  Part  2d,  Sect.  8. 


179 

atood  :  and  it,  doubtless  came  from  the  same  stupid  irrerej:- 
cnce,  which  has  so  often  chai'ged  the  Almiglity  vv  itu  neglect- 
ing to  fulfil  his  promises,  as  well  as  his  menaces.  «  There 
"  shall  come  in  tiie  last  days  scoffers  walking  after  their  own 
«  lusts,  and  saying,  where  is  the  promise  of  his  coming  ?" 
For  cliarging  God  with  a  breach  of  promise,  lie  made  the 
Israelites  wander  fortv  years  in  the  wilderness.* 

The  Bible  says  that  God  "doth  not  affl  ct  willingly,  nor  grieve 
^'  the  children  of  men  :''*'  yet,  according  to  the  above  tlieory, 
all  the  sufferings  of  the  creation  in  time  and  eternity  are  in- 
flicted, not  because  the  honour  of  God  requires  the  execution 
of  justice,  but  because  he  afflicts  willingly  and  gratuitously. 
The  distinguishing  love  of  Christ,  in  taking  upon  him  our 
nature,  instead  of  the  nature  of  fallen  angels,  is  highly  cele- 
brated in  the  Scriptures :  yet,  according  to  this  theory,  his 
sufferings  were  unnecessary,  as  there  was  nothing  in  divine 
truth  and  justice,  to  hinder  the  salvation  of  men  and  devils 
without  a  Mediator. 

But  what  saith  the  scripture  about  the  faithfulness  of  God 
in  the  execution  of  his  threatenings  ?  "  Hear  this  word  that 
"  the  Lord  hath  spoken  against  you,  O  Children  of  Israel  ! 
"  against  the  whole  family  which  I  brought  up  from  the  land 
"  of  Egypt,  saying,  you  only  have  I  known  of  all  the  families 
"  of  the  earth  :  therefore  I  will  punish  you  for  all  your  iniqui- 
"  ties."  "  As  I  live,  saith  the  Lord,  though  Coniah,  the  son 
"  of  Jehoiakira,  King  of  Judah  were  the  signet  upon  my  right 
•*  hand,  yet  would  I  pluck  thee  thence."  *'  And  also  the 
"  strength  of  Israel  will  not  lie  nor  repent :  for  he  is  not  a 
«  man  that  he  should  repent.''^  On  the  two  first  of  these  texts 
Winchester  speaks  well.  Take  a  part  of  his  remarks  on  the 
second.  "  Consider  first,  who  speaks.  Jehovah :  He  not 
"only  speaks,  but  confirms  his  threatening  with  an  oath  ;  and 
"  because  he  can  swear  by  no  greater,  he  swore  by  himself, 
"by  his  own  life  :  *  As  I  live,  saith,  Jehovah,  though  Coniah, 
"thesonof  Jehoiakim,King  of  Judah;' though  he  isof  thefami- 
"  ly  of  David,  with  whom  I  have  made  an  everla-^ting  coven- 
"  ant,  ordered  in  all  things,  and  sure ;  and  tiiough  he  is 
"  anointed  King  over  my  people;  I  will  not  spare  him:  yea 
"  though  he  *  vvere  the  signet  upon  my  right  hand,  yet 
"  would  I  pluck  thee  thence.'  "  In  another  place  he  says, 
"  I  as  much  believe  as  you  or  any  other  man  can  do,  that  all 

a  2  Pet.  Jii.  3.  4.  Num.  xiv.  3.  34. 

b  Lain.  ili.  33. 

0  Amos  iii.  2.    Jcr.  xxii:  24.    1  Sam.  xv.  29. 


ISO 

••  the  threateuings  will  be  fulfilled  upon  the  finally  inapeni- 
**  tent  "a  Although  Bishop  Newton  was  an  Universalist,  he 
speaks  on  this  subject  in  the  following  manner,  viz.  **  If  God 
*•  will  not  execute  as  well  as  threaten,  why  doth  he  threaten 
"  at  all  ?  Is  it  not  more  suitable  to  the  character  of  a  God  of 
"  truth,  and  becoming  the  simplicity  and  sincerity  of  a  divine 
"  revelation,  to  declare  the  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth, 
**  and  leave  it  to  work  upon  men  as  it  can,  rather  than  de- 
**  nounce,  in  the  most  solemn  manner,  w  hat  w  as  never  in- 
**  tended,  and  what  shall  never  come  to  pass;  and  so  en- 
"  deavour  to  alarm  them  with  false  fears,  and  to  work  upon 
*'  them  w  ith  false  persuasions,  which  have  nothing  to  answer 
''themr'b 

That  the  theory  which  we  are  opposing  does  impeach  the 
veracity  of  the  Almiohty,  as  the  Bishop  here  intimates,  is 
evident  from  the  third  text  quoted  above,  from  1  Sam.  15  :  29- 
In  the  preceding  verse,  the  prophet  Samuel  said  to  king 
Saul,  "  The  Loi  d  bath  rent  the  kingdom  of  Israel  from  thee 
*'  this  day,  and  hath  given  it  to  a  neighbour  of  thine  that  is 
*'  belter  than  thon."  Although  this,  like  other  predictions, 
is  given  in  an  historical  form,  it  is  evidently  a  threat.  Saul 
repented  not  of  sin,  but,  as  he  had  seen  much  of  the  forbear- 
ance of  the  God  of  Israel,  he  was  tempted  to  hope  that  he 
would  repent  of  his  threatening,  after  the  manner  of  earthly 
parents,  who,  through  a  sinful  infirmity,  neglect  to  inflict  a 
threatened  punishment.  Samuel,  aware  of  this,  intimates 
unequivocally,  that  such  a  suspicion  would  virtually  give  the 
lie  to  his  Maker.  He  therefore  adds  in  the  very  next  words 
to  the  threatening,  "  And  also  the  strength  of  Israel  will  not 
"  lie  nor  repent :  for  he  is  not  a  man  that  he  should  repent." 

What  does  the  prophet  mean  by  saying  that  God  "  is  not  a 
**  man  that  he  should  repent  ?"  Do  not  the  scriptures  fre- 
quently ascribe  repentance  to  God  ?  T  es,  but  not  man's  sort 
of  repentance.  When  man  repents  of  a  threatening,  or  ne- 
glects to  execute  it,  we  may  account  for  it  on  the  ground  of 
caprice,  corruption  by  bribery,  or  conviction  of  error;  on 
the  ground  of  forgetfuloess  or  fickliness,  fear,  favour  or 
feebleness.  But  none  of  these  causes  can  justly  be  attribu-^ 
ted  to  that  God  who  is  infinitely  wise  and  powerful,  steadfast, 
holy  and  upright.  He  has  no  such  pusillanimous  fears,  nor 
personal  partialities  as  would  move  him  to  pass  by  sins  for 
which  there  is  no  atonement.     His  is  the  repentance  of  God 


a  Uia1og;uc  5th.     AndreTTs  p.  74. 
b  Andrews,  p.  27. 


181 

and  n(»t  of  man.  He  never  repents  of  Iiis  threatenings 
against  the  finally  impenitent,  and  whenever  a  man  repents  of 
sin,  God  never  tails  to  repent  of  his  previous  threats  against 
him.  "  At  what  instant  I  shall  speak  concerning  a  nation, 
"and  concerning  a  kingdom,  to  pluck  up,  and  to  pull  down, 
"  and  to  destrov  it ;  if  that  nation  against  whom  1  havepro- 
"  nounced,  turn  from  their  evil,  I  will  repent  of  the  evil  (hat 
"  I  thought  to  do  unto  them.  And  at  what  instant  1  shall 
"  speak  concerning  a  nation,  and  concerning  a  kingdom,  to 
"  build  and  to  plant  it;  if  it  do  evil  in  my  sight,  that  it  obey 
"  not  my  voice,  then  I  will  repent  of  the  good,  wherewith  I 
"  said  I  would  benefit  them.''a  These  are  the  gospel  princi- 
ples, in  the  maintenance  of  which,  Jeremiah  threatened  the 
house  of  Israel.  To  these  principles  Jonah  yielded  a  reluc- 
tant accordance  when  threatening  the  Ninevites.  "  Was  not 
"  this  my  saying  when  I  was  yet  in  my  country?  Therefore 
"  I  fled  before  unto  Tarshisb  ;  for  I  knew  that  thou  art  a  gra- 
"  cious  God,  and  merciful,  slow  to  anger,  and  of  great  kind- 
*'  ness,  and  repentest  thee  of  the  evil."^*  From  Jonah  or  from 
Jonah's  God,  the  king  of  N'neveb  had  learned  the  same  doc- 
trine :  for  which  reason  he  proclaimed  a  fast,  and  said  "  Let 
"  man  and  beast  be  covered  with  sackcloth,  and  cry  mighlily 
"  unto  God  :  yea,  let  them  turn  every  one  from  his  evil  way. 
"  and  from  the  violence  that  is  in  their  hands.  Who  can  tell 
"  if  God  will  turn  and  repent,  and  turn  away  from  his  fierce 
"  anger,  that  we  perish  not."c 

These  passages  are  abundant  evidence  in  the  question 
whether  the  threatening  against  Nineveh  vpas  absolute  or  con- 
ditional. If  Jonah  believed  it  to  be  absolute,  why  did  he 
complain  of  that  grace  and  mercy  through  which  God  remits 
the  threatened  punishment  on  condition  of  repentance  and 
faith?  If  the  Ninevites  considered  it  absolute,  why  did  thev 
repent  and  believe,  with  the  express  hope  that  on  these  con- 
ditions, God  would  "  repent  and  turn  away  from  his  fierce 
"  anger  that  we  perish  not  P  If  God  intended  it  to  be  abso- 
lute, why  did  he  publish,  as  an  invariable  rule  of  his  universal 
government,  that  if  a  nation  repented  of  the  sin,  he  would 
repent  of  the  evil  ?  These  things  shew  that  the  menace  was 
really  conditional ;  that  it  was  so  intended  on  the  part  of 
tjrod,  and  that  it  was  so  understood  by  the  prophet  and  those 
to  whom  he  addressed  it.  They  were  to  be  destroyed  in  forty 
days  unless  they  repented  ; — but  they  did  repent  ,•— there- 

aJer.  II:  7—10. 

fc  Jonah  4:2.  c  Jonah  3  ;  8,  9. 


182 

ibre  the  threat  did  not  call  for  the  immediate  destruction  of 
tlie  identical  offenders,  but  was  accomplislied  without  it. 

^^h ether  the  same  principle  w  ill  apply  to  the  threat  against 
Adam  for  eating  the  forbidden  fruit,  need  not  now  be  dis- 
cussed. "  For  in  the  day  that  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt 
su-ely  die."  Suffice  it  to  say,  that  if  this  threat,  like  that 
against  Nineveh,  loft  room  for  the  interposition  of  the  seed  of 
the  woman,  and  if  Adam  laid  hold  of  this  gracious  plan  of  sal- 
ration,  as  did  the  Ninevites,  then  there  was  no  call  for  his 
destruction.  In  such  a  case  it  was  not  the  intention  of  the 
Almighty  that  the  punishment  should  be  inflicted  upon  the  of- 
fending individual,  but  upon  that  Saviour  whom  his  faith 
embraced.  If,  by  a  living  faith,  he  did  receive  the  promise 
offered  to  him  diicctly  after  his  fall,  then  he  was  immediate- 
ly justified  ;  and  in  receiving  forgiveness  through  faith,  his 
sins  were  transferred  by  imputation  to  "  the  Lamb  slain  from 
the  foimdation  of  the  world;"*  in  whom  he  died  vicariously, 
as  Isaac  is  said  to  have  died  and  arisen  again  figuratively,  in 
the  ram  which  God  sent  to  die  in  his  place,  as  a  type  of  his 
divine  Surety.b 

But  even  supposing  that  Adam  did  not  receive  the  offered 
n\ercy,  does  the  language  of  the  threat  necessarily  imply  tliat 
he  should  expire  within  twenty -four  hours  of  his  transgres- 
sion ?  Let  it  be  remembered  that  this  whole  theory  rests  up- 
on a  restricted,  and  I  might  say,  arbitrary  interpretation  of 
a  monographical  Hebrew  particle.  But  this  particle  which 
is  here  used  in  connexion  with  day,  and  translated  '*  in  the 
day,''*  is;  in  Numb.*xxviii.  26,  used  in  connexion  with  weeks, 
and  as  correctly  translated,  "  after  the  weeks.*'''^  Even  if  the 
threat  had  been  executed  a  thousand  ye^rs  after  that  day  in- 
stead of  jw  that  very  day, the  Apostle  has  told  us  that  "one 
day  is  with  the  Lord  as  a  thousand  yeai's,  and  a  thousand 
years  as  one  day."  This  declaration  is  made  by  Peter  for 
the  very  same  purpose  for  which  it  is  quoted  hcie  ;  to  prove 
that "  the  Lord  is  not  slack  concerning  his  promise  as  some 
men  count  slackness.''^^ 

The  truth  is  that  the  prophetic  Scriptures  often,  if  not  usu- 
ally, speak  of  a  thing  as  being  done  on  the  day  in  which  a  de- 
cree is  published  that  it  shall  be  done.     Of  this  description  is 

a  Rev.  xiii.  8. 

bUebr.  xi    19. 

cThis  fact,  though'mentiolierl  by  Parkhurst,  never  occurred  to  me,  until  auf^- 
!»e»tc(l  by  a  Physician  of  this  place,  to  whose  kindness  I  «ra  ranch  indebted,  in 
common  with  many  of  my  Ministerial  brethren. 

d  '2  Pet.  iii.  8.  9. 


183 

that  thi'eatening  which  Samuel  uttered  against  Saul,  when  he 
so  forcibly  assured  him  of  the  divine  veracity  in  tlie  extcutioii 
of  his  tncnaces.  "  The  hoid hath  rent  tiie  kingthmi  of  Israel 
"  from  {Jice  this  day,  and  hath  given  it  to  a  neighbour  of 
"  thine  tluit  is  better  than  thou. '  In  respect  of  the  date  this 
threat  is  as  express  as  that  against  Adam.  The  stiipling  who 
slew  Goliah  had  not  yet  left  his  father's  (locks.  According 
to  the  theory  now  befoie  us,  the  transfei  of  the  kingdom  fioin 
Saul  to  David  is  to  take  place  this  dai/,  or  the  threatening  is 
not  fullilled  at  all.  Was  this  the  meaning  of  Samuel?  or  did 
Saul  understand  it  thus  ?  Eotli  of  them  proceed  as  if  they 
considered  it  only  tlie  declaration  of  a  decree  which  was  as 
certainly  to  be  accomplished  hereafter,  as  if  it  liad  already 
been  fulfilled  on  tiiit,  day.  Why  is  Clirist  called  "  the  Lamb 
slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  world,"  when,  in  fact,  he  was 
not  literally  slain  until  four  thousand  years  after  ?  Because 
the  eternal  decree  of  God,  whicii  contemplated  this  sacrifice, 
was  published  to  Adam,  in  the  promise  of  the  seed  of  the  wo- 
man to  bruise  the  serpent's  head ;  and  because  Adam  com- 
menced immediately  to  make  believing  draughts  upon  those 
resources  of  grace  which,  according  to  the  purpose  of  God 
were  *•  given  us  in  Christ  Jesus  belbie  the  world  began."*  In 
Paul's  discourse  to  the  people  of  Antioch>  he  shewed  that 
David  in  Ps.  ii.  7,  spoke  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  "  I 
"will  declare  the  decree  :  The  Lord  hath  said  unto  me.  Thou 
** art  my  Son;  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee."  Although  the 
Son  of  God  was  mysteriously  and  imcomprehensiblv  begotten 
of  the  Father  fi-om  all  eternity  (for  there  can  be  no  Father 
without  a  Son*^)  yet  was  the  body  of  Christ  literally  raised 
from  the  dead  on  this  day^  even  the  day  on  which  David  wrote? 
No:  but  the  prophet  declared  the  decree  on  this  day ;  and  this 
made  liis  resurrection  as  certain  as  if  it  had  already  occurred ; 
since  it  was  the  promise  of  that  "  God  who  quickencth  the 
*'  dead,  and  calleth  those  things  which  be  not  as  though  they 
**  were."d  But  if  Hb,  who  is  tlie  author  of  language  and  the 
judge  of  language,  has  chosen,  in  infinite  sovereignty,  to  a- 
dopt  such  a  style  of  prophecy,  as  declares  the  death  and  re<^ 
surrection  of  the  second  Adam  to  be  already  past,  thousands 
of  years  before  they  come  to  pass,  is  it  any  wonder  that  he 
should  speak  of  the  death  of  the  first  Adam,  as  taking  place 
hundreds  of  years  before  he  expired  ?  If,  in  the  true,  consist- 
ent, and  intelligible  language  of  prophecy,  he  declared  that 

a  2  rim.  i.  9.  c  Hebr.  i.  8. 

*»  Acts  x'm.  33.  i  Bom   iy.  17. 


184 

David  a  type  of  Christ,  had  supplanted  Saul,  a  type  of  Satan, 
on  the  very  day  of  Saul's  transgression,  shall  we  impeach  his 
veracity,  when  he  declares  that  Adam  shall  die  on  the  day  of 
his  transgression  ?  If  he  who  is  seized  with  a  mortal  disease, 
or  capitally  condemned  by  the  civil  court,  may  say  with 
truth, "  I  am  a  dead  man,"  how  much  more  emphatically  may 
this  be  said  of  one  against  whom  the  sentence  of  heaven  is 
past,  and  w  hose  soul  and  body  are  seized  with  the  leprosy  of 
sin  and  mortality  ! 

If  therefore.,  the  threat  against  Adam  subjected  him  to  dis- 
ease and  moi  tality,  which  is  an  inceptive  death  ; — if  it  was 
pronounced  in  prophetic  language  which  speaks  of  things 
in  distant  futurity  as  already  past,  and  speaks  of  the  publi- 
cation of  a  decree  as  its  substantial  accomplishment ; — if 
moi'eover,  it  w  as  conditional,  and  that  death  which  he  after- 
ward suffered  was  sent  as  a  gracious  blessing,  instead  of  a 
legal  curse ; — then  we  say  that  the  threat  was  executed  in 
that  sense  in  which  it  was  intended  to  be  performed,  and  ac- 
cording to  the  tnie  import  of  language:  wherefore,  it  was 
not  only  uttered  as  a  measure  of  divine  justice,  but  executed 
as  an  evidence  of  divine  veracity. 

"When  God  pronounced  the  sentence  of  death  upon  Adam 
and  the  Ninevites,  and  when  he  says  concerning  all  men, 
*•'  the  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die,"  *  how  can  these  threats 
be  truly  considered  ameasureof  divine  justice,  without  being 
executed  ?  Justice  is  a  disti*ibution  of  rewards  and  punish- 
ments, according  to  our  deserts.  According  to  justice,  sin 
must  be  punished  wherever  it  is  found,  and  no  being  must  be 
punished  without  sin.  As  it  would  be  unjust  to  punish  one 
who  had  no  guilt,  either  personal  or  imputed,  so  would  it  be 
unjust  to  permit  any  sin  of  any  responsible  being  to  escape, 
without  its  legal  measure  of  punishment,  either  in  the  indivi- 
dual offender  or  an  adequate  substitute.  That  the  plan  of  re- 
demption is  not  only  a  glorious  illustration  of  divine  grace 
and  mercy,  but  an  equally  glorious  vindication  of  divine  ti*uth 
and  justice,  is  manifest  from  the  whole  word  of  God,  and 
sometimes  most  conspicuously  from  those  passages  which 
are  obtrusively  urged  against  this  docti'ine.  In  the  case  of 
the  Ninevites  we  do  not  find  Jonah  dreading  their  forgive- 
ness under  an  apprehension  that  God  was  deficient  in  truth 
or  justice,  but  he  says  "  I  knew  that  thou  art  a  gracious 
"  God  and  merciful."    In  the  case  of  Adam  we  find  that 

SI  Ez.  18:  4:. 


185 

mercy  and  grace  are  revealed  through  the  Seed  of  the  wo- 
man. From  a  Jatci-  writer  we  leain  that  this  seed  of  the 
woman  "  is  tiie  end  of  the  law  for  rigiiteousness  to  every  one 
"  that  helieveth."  a  The  end  of  the  iaw  !  For  what  end  was 
the  law  made  ?  For  obedience  or  disobedience?  If  the  for- 
mer then  Christ,  in  becoming  the  end  of  the  law,  obeyed  the 
Jaw.  Was  the  law  made  for  the  end  that  it  might  be  pros- 
trated, or  that  it  might  be  satished  i  If  Christ  fulHlled  all 
righteousness  ;  if  lie  magnified  the  law  and  made  it  honora- 
ble, b  then,  in  becoming;  the  end  of  the  law,  he  satisfied  all  its 
demands  preceptive  and  penal.  Tiiis  he  did  for  the  foren- 
sic justification  of  believers;  for  he  became  the  end  of  the  law 
for  righfeoHsnss,  (or  justification,)  to  every  one  thathelie- 
veth,"  whether  in  the  tiaie  of  Adam  or  Jonah,  or  John  the 
Baptist  or  John  WickliflTe;  "  For  all  have,  sinned  and  come 
"short  of  the  glory  of  God  ;  Uc'mg  justijied  freely,  by  his 
"  grace,  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus ;  whom 
"God  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in  his 
"  blood."  As  this  redemption  or  propitiation  was  effected 
long  after  the  time  of  those  ancient  transgressors,  one  might 
be  tempted  to  question  the  righteousness  of  the  most  High, 
in  the  remission  of  these  sins  wfiich  were  committed  so  long 
ago,  and  passed  by  witli  impunity  by  the  forbearance  of  God. 
How  can  you  at  this  time,  vindicate  tlie  righteousness  of  Gt)d 
in  this  procedure  ?  How  can  he  be  just,  aiid  the  justifier  of 
sinners  who  lived  and  died  before  the  atonement  was  made? 
The  very  next  words  of  the  Apostle,  to  those  last  quoted,  are 
an  answer  to  these  en*iuiries.  He  represents  God  as  setting 
forth  this  propitiation,  not  to  relax  his  righteousness,  or  to 
shew  how  he  can  justify  a  sinner  contrary  to  his  justice;  but 
"to  dec\sive\\is  ric//iteoiisiiess  for  the  remission  of  sins  that 
"  are  past,  through  the  foi-hearance  of  God ;  to  declare,  I 
"  say,  at  this  time,  his  righteousness;  that  he  might  he  just , 
"^a-ndthejusti^er  of  him  which  believeth  in  Jesus."  Now 
that  the  claims  of  the  law  are  perfectly  satisfied,  through  his 
one  offering,  in  behalf  of  all  believers  in  every  age  of  the 
world,  God's  faithfulness  and  justice,  which  doom  the  impe- 
nitent to  hell,  require  the  salvation,  of  those  who  like  the  Ni- 
nevites,  embrace  the  atonement.  "  If  we  confess  our  sins, 
"  he  is  faithful  a.n(\  just  to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse 
"  us  from  all  unrighteousness."  ^ 

a  Rom.  10;  4.  c  Rom,  iii.  23—26. 

b  Matt.  iii.  15.  Isa.  xlii.  21.  d  1  John  i,  9. 

z 


186 

Before  my  remarks  on  the  divine  perfections,  as  they  have 
a  bearing  upon  future  punisliment,  are  brouglit  to  a  close,  it 
is  right  to  take  some  notice  of  that  incongruity  wiiich  the 
enemies  of  God  think  that  they  see  between  his  severer  and 
milder  attributes.  How,  they  say,  can  he  be  merciful,  if  he 
must  satisfy  his  justice  by  the  infliction  of  punishments  which 
we  would  suppose  cruel  in  the  extreme  ?  Can  he  who  re- 
quires the  condign  punishment  of  every  sin,  either  in  the  of- 
fender or  his  substitute,  be  said  to  exercise  any  grace  or  for- 
giveness at  all  ?  and  can  that  heart  be  ineffably  tender,  which 
can  voluntarily  witness  the  most  excruciating  anguish  in  his 
fallen  creatures  to  all  eternity  ?  Such  objectors  think  that 
it  is  impossible  for  God  to  he  just,  and  at  the  same  time  the 
merciful  and  forgiving  jusiijier  of  the  believer ;  although 
the  scriptures  assure  us  that  the  reconciliation  of  these  two 
things,  in  the  salvation  of  sinners,  w^as  the  reason  w  hy  Jesus 
Christ  was  set  fortlr  as  a  propitiation. 

If  it  w^ould  derogate  from  the  mercy  of  God  to  inflict  the 
threatened  punishment  upon  Adam,  what  shall  we  say  of  the 
fact  that  through  his  sin,  the  whole  world  is  brought  into  a 
a  state  of  sin  and  misery?  "For  the  creature  was  made 
'^subject  to  vanity,  not  willingly,  but  by  reason  of  him  who 
**  hath  subjected  the  same  in  hope."  What  shall  we  say  of 
the  fact  that,  on  account  of  this  general  and  involuntary  sub- 
jection to  vanity,  through  Adam, "  the  whole  creation  groan- 
**  eth  and  travaileth  in  pain  together  until  now  ?"*  This 
takes  place  under  the  sovereign  superintendance  and  the 
omniscient  inspection  of  that  God  who  is  infinitely  merciful 
as  well  as  infinitely  just.  He  is  a  voluntary  witness  of  the 
cries  of  nascent  infancy,  the  agonies  of  mature  vigoui',  and 
the  groans  of  expiring  age.  In  the  appropriate  exercise  of 
infinite  tenderness  of  heart,  he  beholds  his  rebellious  crea- 
tures in  every  country,  and  in  eveiy  ])Ciiod  of  their  protrac- 
ted history,  writhing  under  the  pressure  of  sickness  and  sin, 
penury  and  persecution.  He  commissions  his  angels  to  des- 
troy them;  and  his  own  providence  sends  the  sword  and  pes- 
tilence, hurricane  and  earthquake,  fire,  flood  and  famine,  to 
sweep  millions  from  a  life  of  suffering  here,  to  fiercer  and 
more  enduring  pains  in  another  world  :  yet  these  terrible 
things  in  righteousness  are  consistent  with  infinite  mercy. 

Even  in  the  same  human  bosom  we  sometimes  find  such  a 
mixture  of  mercy  and  justice, — of  lovely  softness,  and  awful 
sternness,  as  excites  the  admiration  of  mankind.   Of  this  we 

a  Roin.  viii.  20,  ^i. 


187 

have  a  memorable  example  in  the  conduct  of  one  whose  name 
is  dear  to  every  American,  and  who  w  as  no  less  conspicuous 
for  his  love  of  peace,  than  for  his  skill  in  war.     You  all  re- 
collect that,  under  Providence,  a  single  word  from  Wash- 
ington could  once  have  saved  the  life  of  Major  Andre.  With- 
out  detracting  from  the  female  character,  it  may  be  said 
with  truth,  that  not  a  bosom  among  my  fair  audience,  glows 
with  more  tender  and  unfeigned  pity  for  suffering  humanity, 
than  did  the  breast  of  Washington.     Yet  justice  steeled  his 
heart  against  the  united  importunities  of  two  contending  na- 
tions.    The  law  condemns  the  prisoner  to  death.    The  vital 
interests  of  our  country  demand  the  execution  of  the  righte- 
ous sentence.     But  can  no  mitigation  be  allowed  ?  Remem- 
ber that  it  was  not  personal  or  political  animosity,  but  pro- 
fessional enthusiasm  that  brought  him  to  our  shores.     He 
traversed  the  ocean  to  heal  a  wounded  heart,  and  seek  for 
glory  in  a  foreign  land.     Whether  he  shall  die  the  most  dis- 
graceful death,  or  die  at  all,  is  now  to  be  decided.     The 
General's  feelings,   needing   no  excitement,  have  already 
been  excited  by  numerous  written  petitions.     At  last  the 
youthful,  blooming,  smiling,  accomplished  soldier  stands  be- 
fore him.     His  person  and  his  manners  kindle  the  admiring 
eyes  of  myriads  of  spectators.     Touched  with  the  history  of 
his  life  and  his  impending  death,  they  turn  their  supplicating 
looks  toward  the  arbiter  of  his  fate.    Compassion  revelled  in 
his  bosom,  glistened  in  his  eye,  and  bedewed  his  manly  cheek. 
But  justice  was  enthroned  in  his  inmost  soul  :  and  although, 
the  waves  of  popular  desire  added  force  to  the  flood  of  his 
own  paternal  feelings,  they  dashed  against  a  rock  which  hid 
its  summit  in  the  clouds,  and  its  base  in  the  centre  of  the 
earth.     He  pitied  but  he  pardoned  not. 

Hear  what  the  God  of  justice  and  mercy  says  concerning  im- 
penitent [Convicts.  "  I  will  not  pity,  nor  spare,  nor  have  mer- 
cy, but  destroy  them/'a  or  as  the  margin  reads, "nor  have  mercy 
from  destroying  them  ;"  that  is^pily  shall  not  make  me  spare 
them,  nor  mercy  keep  me  from  destroying  them,  "  But  is  there 
no  balm  in  Gilead  ?  Is  there  no  Physician  there  ?"  "  Let 
Israel  hope  in  ih-^  Lord  :  for  with  the  Lo'd  there  is  mercy, 
and  with  him  is  plenteous  redemption."  Every  believer  is 
"  justified  freely  by  his  grace,  through  the  redcniptioii  that 
IS  in  Christ  Jesus."  "  In  him  mercy  and  truth  are  nset  to- 
gether :  righteousness  and  peace  have  kissed  each  other.^b 

•  Jer.  xiii.  14.     Lam.  ii.  2.     Zech.  xi.  6. 

b  Jer.  viii.  22.     Ps.  cxxx.  ".    Rom.  iii.  24.     Ps.  Ixxxv.  10. 


188 

Without  this  interposition  of  the  Son  of  God  to  procure  mer- 
cy for  us,  by  satislying  justice  for  us,  sinners  never  could 
have  been  saved  in  consistency  with  the  divine  at- 
ti'ibutes,  and,  therefore,  never  could  have  been  saved 
at  all.  And  so  far  is  this  plan  fron)  not  deserving  the 
name  of  mercif  or  grace^  because  justice  is  satisfied, 
this  is  the  very  consideration  whicii  enliances  the  lustre 
of  these  perfections  beyond  all  conception.  To  forgive  at 
the  expense  of  purity  or  veracity,  claims  not  our  admiration; 
to  save  without  a  sacrifice  is  cheap  and  easy,  and  claims  com- 
paratively little  gratitude.  But  when  God's  justice,  which 
is  essential  to  his  nature,  required  that  the  sins  of  his  enemies 
should  be  fully  punished  either  in  their  own  persons,  or  in 
his  eternal  Son,  the  only  adequate  substitute  which  the  uni- 
verse afforded ;  his  interposition  with  such  a  sacrifice,  may 
well  excite  the  admiration  of  angels,  and  the  contrition  and 
eternal  gratitude  of  all  his  blood-bought  people.  The  sweet- 
est ingredient  in  the  glorious  cup  of  salvation,  is,  that  when 
immutable  justice  called  for  our  destruction,  "God  so  loved 
•'  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son  [the  just  for 
"  the  unjust]  that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not 
•'  perish  but  have  everlasting  life."a 

IV.  In  connexion  with  the  severer  attributes  of  God,  it 
Was  proposed  to  infer  the  doctrine  of  eternal  punishment 
from  the  scriptural  account  of  sin,  It  is  not  my  intention 
here  to  discuss  the  question,  whether  there  is  or  is  not  an  in- 
finite evil  in  everj  sin.  You  may  easily  conjecture  my  rea- 
son for  omitting  an  argument  which  has  been  deemed  of  so 
much  importance  in  this  controversy,  by  President  Edwards, 
Dr.  Wylie,  and  other  excellent  writers.  My  remarks  might 
possibly  be  adopted  with  equal  ease  by  them,  and  by  their 
brethren  who  deny  that  absolute  infinity  belongs  to  a  creature 
or  any  of  his  actions ;  and  who  believe  that  there  is  as  much 
of  an  objective  infinity  in  obedience  as  in  disobedience. 
As  the  best  men  that  have  ever  lived,  inspired  or  uninspired, 
have  had  reason  to  pray  that  God  would  convince  them  of 
secret  faults,  it  is  probable  that  none  but  the  infinite  mind 
can  ever  see  the  least  sin  of  the  least  sinner,  in  the  extent  of 
its  turpitude. 

But  let  us  see  how  universalism  represents  this  greatest 
of  all  evils.  My  opponent  speaks  in  the  following  language, 
viz.  "As  the  diseases  of  the  body  are  mere  privations,  of 
"  health,  so  the  disorders  of  the  mind  are  all  merely  negative^ 

It  John  iii.  16.    IPet.iiLlS. 


189 

"  a  lack  or  want  of  their  contrary  virtues  ;  the  same  as  dark- 
"  ness  is  nothing  more  than  the  absence  or  want  of  light. 
*'  Hence  ignorance,  folly,  injustice,  hatred,  crueify,  &c.  are 
"  only  the  want  of  knowledge,  wisdom,  justice,  love,  mercy, 
"  &c.  and  therefore  these  are  the  sovereign  remedies  for  the 
*'  mind.  Yea,  all  the  remedies  for  the  moral  maladies  and 
*'  vices  of  the  human  heart,  are  to  be  sought  for  in  their  con- 
"  trary  virtues."*  Take  notice,  he  declares  that  all  sin  is 
negative;  and  not  only  so,  but  it  is  ''''merely/  negative;''  that 
is,  there  is  nothing  positive  about  it:  and  he  applies  this  re- 
mark to  such  sins  as  "  injustice,  hatred,  cruelty,  &c."  Now 
is  it  true  that  a  man  may  lie,  and  cheat  his  neighbour  and 
pollute  his  family  and  incur  no  positive  guilt?  Is  there  no- 
thing more  than  a  mere  negation  in  swearing,  gaming,  sab- 
bath-breaking, and  intemperance?  Does  my  opponent  give 
this  view  of  sin  when  he  is  speaking  of  the  real  or  supposed 
offences  of  orthodox  christians  ?  What  is  it  that  gives  such 
exquisite  interest  to  the  case  of  St.  Augustine  and  his  para- 
mour, the  case  of  John  Knox  and  Cardinal  Beatoun,  and  es- 
pecially that  of  Calvin  and  Servetus  ?  At  the  very  mention 
of  these  subjects  in  an  heretical  circle,  animation  fills  every 
heart,  and  eloquence  moves  every  tongue.  Kvery  toad  in 
the  company  thinks  himself  a  pattern  of  purity  and  a  giant 
of  greatness.  When  they  turn  the  conversation  from  charac- 
ters of  such  transcendant  talents,  piety  and  usefulness,  and 
contemplate  the  real  faults  of  itiferior  men,  their  criminal 
code  is  revised  and  corrected;  sin  is  not  quite  so  odious  : 
and  by  the  time  they  are  at  the  bottom  of  the  scale,  among 
Universalists  and  Unitarians,  Atheists  and  Libertines,  sin 
becomes  a  mere  negation.  In  a  character  of  this  descrip- 
tion, deliberate  murder  would  only  be  a  want  of  love !  "  Fools 
"  make  a  mock  at  sin  -^^  and  the  necessary  tendency  of  uni- 
versalism  towards  this  folly,  shows  its  opposition  to  the  Bible. 
In  that  sacred  volume  we  are  taught  that  sin  banished 
angels  of  light  into  eternal  darkness.  It  was  sin  which  re- 
moved Adam  from  the  happy  garden,  and  brought  misery 
and  death  upon  all  his  race.  It  was  sin  which  destroyed 
the  old  world  by  water,  and  the  fertile  plain  of  Sodom  by 
fire  and  brimstone.  On  account  of  sin,  these  elements  shall 
melt  with  fervent  heat ;  and  for  sin,  he  who  made  the  world, 
and  wields  these  elements,  was  made  a  whole  burnt  offering. 
"  Hereby  perceive  we  the  love  of  God,  because  belaid  down 
"  his  life  for  us.*'^   So  odious  is  sin  that  it  must  be  fully  pun- 

a  Lestttres,  p.  195,  b  Prov.  xiv.  9,        c  1  John,  iii.  16. 


190 

isbed  even  when  found  imputed  to  the  Holy  Jesus.  So 
hateful  is  it,  be)<tMd  a  parallel,  that  the  Apostle,for  the  want 
of  a  w'oise  description,  called  sin  ''exceeding  sinlul,'a  be- 
cause there  was  nothina  else  as  bad  as  itself.  The  purity  of 
heaven  cannot  receive  it ;  lor  "  there  shall  in  no  wise  enter 
*'  into  it  any  tliinj^  that  defileth,  neiti)er  whatsoever  worketb 
"  abomination,  or  maketb  a  lie,  but  they  which  are  written 
"  in  the  Lamb's  book  of  life.'  ^  The  holiness  of  God  cannot 
bear  it.  "Thou  art  of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  evil,  and 
"  canst  not  look  on  iniquity."*^  He  requires  holiness  in  all 
his  glorified  subjects.  "  Follow  peace  with  all  men,  and 
"  holiness,  without  which  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord. "d  His 
justice  requires  the  punishment  "even  of  those  sins  which  are 
committed  while  undergoing  the  punishment  of  former  offen- 
ces. "Every  transgression  and  disobedience  receiveth  a 
'•'■just  recompense  of  reward.''^  Thus  does  the  scriptural 
account  o(  sin,  in  connexion  with  the  inspired  account  of 
God's  holiness  and  justice,  infer  the  eternal  punishment  of 
the  finally  impenitent. 

V.  We  infer  the  same  doctrine  from  what  tlie  Bible  says 
of  the  helplessness  of  sinners.  Here  I  shall  undertake  to 
speak  but  little  of  a  distinction  which  some  affect  between  na- 
tural and  moral  inability,  whereby  they  would  prove  that 
a  man  who  can  do  nothing  without  Christ,  can  do  every  thing 
without  him.  My  sentiments  on  this  subject,  are  those  of 
the  reformation  j  those  which  Luther  advocated  in  opposi- 
tion to  Erasmus  ;  those  which  the  AVestminster  Assembly 
adopted ;  those  which  the  Presbyterians  of  Scotland  and 
America  liave  received  ;  those  which  the  General  Assembly 
of  our  church  have  ratified  by  a  judicial  decision ;  and  those 
which  are  found  in  the  oracles  of  God.  I  believe  sincerely, 
as  I  professed  to  believe,  when  consenting  to  the  Confession 
of  Faith  in  my  ordination,  that  "  man,  by  his  fall  into  a  state 
"of  sin,  hath  wholly  lost  all  ability  of  will  to  any  spiritual 
"  good  accompanying  salvation  :  so  as  a  natural  man  being 
**  altogether  averse  from  that  which  is  good,  and  dead  in  sin, 
*•  is  not  able  by  liis  own  strength,  to  convert  himself,  or  to 
"  prepare  himself  thereunto ;"  that  sinners  '*  arc  utterly  in- 
*'  disposed,  disabled  jind  ma(ie  opposite  to  all  good,  and  whol- 
*'ly  inclined  to  all  evil ;"  that  "their  a'^^ility  to  do  good 

a  l.'oiii.  vii.  13.  b  ]ttv.  xxi.  27. 

c  Haob.  i.  IS.  (IHeb.  xii.  14. 

e  Heb.  ii.  2. 


191 

"works  is  not  at  all  of  themselves,  but  wholly  from  the  Spi- 
•♦rit  of  Christ."" 

Tliese  declarations  describe  our  condition  in  a  state  of  na- 
ture, while  unconnected  witii  an  Almighty  Redeemer  ;  and 
let  it  be  remembered  that  Mr.  Winchester  admits  tliat  some 
are  "eternally  deprived  of  the  glories  and  honours  of  the 
**  kingdom  of  Christ."  According  to  the  Scriptures,  some  of 
these  characters  owe  five  hundred  j)ence,  and  others  fifty,  and 
they  have  "  nothing  to  pay."  Joshua  says,  "  ye  cannot  serve 
tlie  Lardy  Our  Saviour  says,  **  Without  me  ye  can  do  noth' 
ing.''^  Paul  says,  "the  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against  God  j 
"  for  it  is  not  subject  to  the  law  of  God,  neither  indeed  canbe, 
**  So  then,  they  that  are  in  the  flesh  cannot  please  God.'^ 
<*  Strive  to  enter  in  at  the  strait  gate  ;  for  many,  I  say  unto 
you,  shall  strive  to  enter  in,  and  ^hali  not  he  able."  "  Then 
"  said  Jesus  again  unto  tliem,  I  go  my  way,  and  ye  shall 
'*  seek  me,  and  shall  die  in  your  sins.  Wliither  I  go,  ye  can- 
*'  not  come.""  "  For  the  grave  cannot  praise  thee,  death  can- 
**  not  celebrate  thee.  They  that  go  down  into  the  pit,  cannot 
*'  hope  for  thy  truth.""  Tlius  there  are  many  who  are  with- 
out Christ  forever; — But  without  Christ  they  haA^e  nothing 
to  pay  their  debt ;  they  can  do  nothing ;  they  cannot  serve 
God;  they  cannot  submit  to  his  law;  they  cannot  please  him 
by  faith  in  his  gospel,  for  ("  without  faith  it  is  impossible  to 
please  him;*')  they  are  not  able  to  enter  in  at  the  strait  gate ; 
they  cannot  come  to  him  in  Heaven ;  they  cannot  hope  in  him 
when  dying,  nor  praise  nor  celebrate  him  among  the  redeem- 
ed beyond  the  grave. — If  they  can  do  none  of  these  things, 
can  tlicy  be  saved  ?  Blessed  be  Jehovah,  God  of  Israel,  that 
"  when  we  were  yet  without  strength,  in  due  time,  Christ 
died  for  the  ungodly ;"'  that,  when  we  were  helpless,  God 
"  laid  help  upon  One  that  is  Mighty ;"  and  that  although 
Christ  has  said  "no  man  can  come  to  me,  except  the  Father 
which  hath  sent  me  draw  him,"  yet  he  has  also  said,  "  all 
that  the  Father  giveth  me  shall  come  to  me;  and  him  that 
Cometh  to  me,  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out."  Although,  as  a 
punishment  of  sin,  we  are  justly  doomed  to  spiritual  death,  a 
state  of  powerless  corruption  and  misery,  yet  it  is  promised, 
'*  thy  people  shall  be  willing  in  the  day  of  thy  power.'*''  As 
ours  is  a  guilty  helplessness,  it  does  not  release  us  from  the 
obligations  of  the  law  or  of  the  gospel,  the  spirit  says,  "  work 
out  your  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling  :'*  and  to  encour- 
age sinners  to  look  for  divine  assistance,  it  is  added,  "for  it 

aCoafessioDofFjiith,  tbap.  9.  sect.  3.    Chap.  6,  sect.  I>.    Ch«p.  IS.  lett  9. 


192 

is  God  which  workctli  in  you,  both  to  will  and  to  do  of  his 
good  pleasui'c."a 

VI.  In  connexion  with  the  helpless  condition  of  sinners, 
we  proposed  inferring  the  doctrine  of  their  eternal  punish- 
ment, from  the  character,  influence,  and  dominion  of  that  so- 
ciety to  which  the  curse  has  exposed  and  subjected  them. 
It  is  a  very  plain,  though  involuntary  acknowledgment  of  the 
strength  of  this  argument,  when  nniversalists,  in  order  to 
elude  its  force,  deny  the  very  existence  of  fallen  an.i^els. 
This  is  evidently  done  through  the  suggestion  of  the  devil, 
and  to  serve  his  purposes.  When  an  army  approaches  un- 
observed, witiiin  cannon  shot  of  our  camp,  while  we  believe 
that  they  are  not  in  existence,  this  is  as  they  would  have  it : 
and  that  traitor  who  had  lulled  us  into  this  fatal  repose,  in 
opposition  to  many  faithful  warnings,  would  be  considered 
their  humble  servant.  Wnen  this  deceit  of  satan  and  his 
servants  takes  effect,  it  is  no  wonder  that  sinners  are  "  taken 
•'  captive  by  him  at  his  will."  "When  any  one  heareth  the 
*•  word  of  the  kingdom,  and  understandeth  it  not,  then 
"  Cometh  the  wicked  one  and  catcheih  away  that  which  was 
"  sown  in  )iis  heart."  "  The  tares  are  the  children  of  the 
"  wicked  one.  The  enemy  that  soweth  them  is  the  devil.'* 
"  If  our  gospel  be  hid,  it  is  hid  to  them  that  are  lost;  in 
"  whom  the  God  of  this  world  hath  blinded  the  minds  of 
"them  which  believe  not,  lest  the  lightof  the  glorious  gospel 
*'  of  Christ,  who  is  the  image  of  God,  should  shine  unto  them.'* 
**  He  that  committeth  sin  is  of  the  devil,  for  the  devil  sinneth 
"  from  the  beginning  "  "  Ye  do  the  deeds  of  your  father." 
**  Ye  are  of  your  father  the  devil,  and  the  lusts  of  your  father 
"  ye  will  do :  he  was  a  murderer  fi-om  the  beginning,  and 
"  abode  not  in  the  truth,  because  there  is  no  truth  in  him. 
"  W^hen  he  spcaketh  a  lie,  he  speaketh  of  his  own  :  for  be  is 
«  a  liar  and  the  father  of  it'  "  O  full  of  all  subtlely 
"and  all  mischief:  thou  child  of  the  devil!  thou  ene- 
*'  my  of  all  righteousness !  wilt  thou  not  ceaj^e  to  pervert 
"  the  right  ways  of  the  Lord  ?"  "  If  I,  with  the  finger  of 
"  God,  cast  out  devils,  no  doubt,  the  kingdom  of  God  is  come 
"  uj)on  you.  When  a  .strong  man  armed,  keepeth  his  palace, 
**  his  goods  are  in  peace  :  but  when  a  stronger  than  he  shall 
**  come  upon  him,  and  overcome  him,  ho  taketh  from  him 


a  Matt  xviji,  24.  Luke  vil,41,  42.  Jolia  xv,  5.  Josh,  xxiv,  19.  Rom.  viii> 
7,8.  Heb  xi,  6.  Lukexiii,  24;  .John  viii,  21.  Isa.  xxxviii,  18.  Rom.  5,  6* 
Ps.  Uxxix,  19.    John  vi,  4*,  37.    Pa.  ex,  3.    Phil,  ii,  12,  ip. 


19a 

all  his  armour  wherein  he  trusted,  and  di\ i.utii  his  spoils/'^ 
Although  the  Divine  Saviour,  this  stronger  m;i:i,  has  deliver- 
ed many  captives,  there  arc  still  niaiiv,  who,  accordingtoMr. 
Winchester's  own  at  knowledgaieut,  '♦  v. ill  i)e  etenialiy  de- 
prived of  the  glories  and  honours  ol  the  kingdom  of  Chi-ist." 
According  to  the  ah(»ve  Scriptures,  the  dcvilis  a  strong  man, 
and  these  lust  and  blinded  sinners  ai'e  his  capti\es;  the  devil 
is  a  father,  ami  they  are  his  children.  As  might  he  expected, 
they  resemble  each  other.  He  pei'veited  the  rigiit  ways  of  the 
Lord,  and  so  do  tiiey  ;  he  is  a  sinner,  an  enemy  of  allriglite- 
ousness,  a  liar  and  a  murdci-er,  and  so  are  they.  As  I'hrist  is 
the  only  deliverer,  and  as  these  sinners  have,  to  their  own 
eternal  destruction,  i-enounced  any  depcndance  upon  hinj, 
they  must  continue  forever,  under  the  instruction  and  exam- 
ple, donjinioiiandoppression,  of  this  more  than  Egyptian  ty- 
rant. An  aggravation  of  tlicir  hopeless  case  is,  that  they 
nuist  still  continue  to  be  i-ational  and  responsible  beings. 
Their  corruption  and  guilt  must  forever  increase,  and  con- 
setpiently,  to  all  eternity,  the  cloud  of  veng-ancc  must  thicken 
over  them,  and  the  pit  of  their  suffering  shall  be  without  bot- 
tom. 

SECOND  ORTHODOX  ARGUMENT. 

IMPLICATION. 

This  argument  is  inexhaustible  :  for  every  commandment 
of  the  law  i)ni)Iies  a  sanction  ;  every  promise  of  the  gospel 
implies  a  threat  against  gospel  despisers ;  and  every  expres- 
sion of  approbation  to  those  who  repent,  believe,  or  obey, 
who  are  justified,  adopted,  or  sanctified,  implies  the  condeju- 
nation  of  the  contrary  character.  A  few  passages  of  Scrip- 
ture, which  come  under  the  form  of  insinuation,  supposition, 
and  interrogation,  shall  serve  as  specimens  of  implication. 

I.  Insinuation,  Is  not  our  Saviour's  declaration  against 
hypocrites,  that  "  they  have  their  reward,"  an  insinuation 
that  they  have  only  a  temporal  reward  ?  Is  not  the  Psalm- 
ist's declaration  concerning  "  men  of  the  w  orid,  w  ho  have 
•«  their  portion  in  this  life,"  an  insinuation  that  they  have  no 
portion  in  asiother  life  ?  When  the  Apostle  Paul  sai<l  "god- 
"  liness  is  profitable  unto  all  things,  having  promise  of  the 
•'  life  that  now  is,  and  of  that  which  is  to  conu',"  did  he  not 
insinuate  that  the  ungodly  were  without  the  blessing  of  hca- 
A-en  here  and  hereafter  ?     When  our  Saviour  said,  •*  he  that 

a    2  Tim.  ii.  26.     Matt,  xiii  19,  38—43.     2  Cor.  iv.  3,  4.     1  John  \\\  S,  in. 
John  viii  41  4i.       Acts.  xiii.  10.  Luke  xi.  20— QC. 

Aa 


194 

"believeth  on  me  hath  everlasting  life,"  and  "^he  that  be- 
"  licveth  on  me  sliall  never  thrist,"  did  he  not  insinuate  that 
unbelievers  shall  have  their  portion  in  the  lake  of  fire,  which 
is  the  second  death,  and  in  which  there  is  not  a  drop  of  water 
to  quench  their  thrist  ?  All  these  questions  are  plainly  ans- 
wered by  a  voice  directed  fiom  heaven  to  an  inhabitant  of 
this  lake.  ♦'  But  Abraham  said,  son,  remember  that  tiiou  ii» 
"  thy  life-time  receivedst  thy  good  tilings,  and  likewise  La- 
"zarusevil  things:  but  now  he  is  comforted,  and  thou  art 
*'  tormented." 

When  our  Saviour  promises  mercy  and  comfort,  satisfac- 
tion and  sanctification,  a  royal  inheritance,  and  a  heavenly 
reward,  to  the  poor  in  spirit,  the  mourners,  the  meek  and 
mi  iriful,  the  pure,  tlie  persecuted,  and  the  peace  makers,  is 
not  an  opposite  destiny  insinuated  against  opposite  charac- 
ters ?  W  hen  I'etor  says  by  the  spirit  of  God,  '•  he  that  fear- 
«'  eth  him,  and  worketh  righteousness  is  accepted  with  him," 
is  it  not  an  insinuation  that  the  presumptuous  and  disobedi- 
ent shall  be  rejected  ?  AVhen  Paul  says  that  tlie  gospel  '•  is 
"the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  that  bclie- 
"  veth,"  does  he  not  insinuate  that  the  gospel  shall  not  save 
the  unbeliever  ?  When  our  Saviour  says,  *'  blessed  is  he, 
"  whosoever  shall  not  be  offended  in  me,"  and  "  he  that  eu- 
"  dureth  to  the  end  shall  be  saved,"  is  it  not  an  insinuation 
that  those  who  are  offended  with  Christ,  and  turn  back  from 
following  him,  shall  not  be  blessed  or  saved  ?  In  the  doc- 
trinal, experimental,  and  practical  reception  of  Christianity, 
there  are  many  dangers  to  encounter,  and  many  prejudices 
and  corruptions  to  overcome.  Our  Saviour  says,  "  to  him 
**  that  oveicometh  w  ill  I  grant  to  sit  with  me  on  my  throne." 
What  does  this  insinuate  concerning  those  who  are  led  cap- 
tive by  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the  devil  7*^ 

2.  >Suppositiou.  Although  all  the  passages  advanced  un- 
der this  head,  arc  hypothetical  expressions,  all  of  them,  ex- 
cept the  last,  contain  almost  as  manifest  an  innuendo  as 
those  which  have  been  adduced  above.  "  Behold  I  stand  at 
"  the  door  and  knock  :  IP'  any  man  hear  my  voice,  and  open 
**the  dooi*,  I  will  come  in  to  him,  and  will  sup  with  him  and 
"he  with  me."  "If  any  man  therefore  purge  himself  from 
"  these,  he  shall  be  a  vessel  unto  honor."  These  passages 
imply  that  those  who  are  not  cleansed,  and  who  do  not  open 
the  door,  shall  be  banished  fi'om  Christ,  and  treated  with 

a  MaU.  vi.  2,  16.  Luke  xvi.  25.  In.  vi.  47,35.  Rev.  xx.  14.  Ps.  xvii.  14. 
Matt.  V.  a— 12.     Actt.  X.  .35.     Rev.  iii.  21.     M«U.  xi.  6, 10:  22.     Rom.  i.  16. 


195 

contempt :  and  this  is  clscwliere  called  an  **  everlasting  con- 
tempt." Concerning  false  teachers,  our  Saviour  says,  "(F 
*'  it  were  possible,  they  shall  deceive  the  very  elect."  Docs 
not  this  imply  that  all  others  are  fatally  deceived  ?  Paul 
says,  "  let  him  that  thinketh  he  standeth,  take  heed  lest  he 
fall."  If  none  could  fall,  hy  mistaking  tlie  ground  upon 
which  he  stood,  wliy  tliis  caution  ?  The  same  caution  against 
resting  in  a  form  of  godliness  without  the  power,  and  thus 
falling  short  of  real  religion,  is  taught  in  the  following  pas- 
sage. "  Looking  diligently,  lest  any  man  fail  of  the  grace 
"of  God;  LEsr  any  root  of  hilterness  springing  up  trou- 
"  hie  you,  and  thereby  many  be  defiled  ;  les  r  there  be  any 
"  fornicator  or  profane  person,  as  Esau,  who  for  one  morsel 
*'  of  meat,  sold  his  birth  right"  The  sequel  proves  what  is 
here  implied ;  that  these  characters,  like  Esau,  are  rejected 
of  God.  "  For  if  they  escaped  not  who  rejected  him  that 
"  spake  on  earth,  much  more  shall  not  we  escape,  if  we  turn 
"  away  from  Him  tliat  speaketh  from  Heaven."* 

My  last  text,  which  I  observed,  did  not  contain  an  inuen- 
do,  may  be  considered  as  amounting  to  positive  proof,  al- 
though it  contains  a  supposition.  *'  The  Son  of  man  goeth, 
"  as  it  is  written  of  him ;  but  woe  unto  that  man  by  whom 
**  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed  !  it  had  been  good  for  that  man 
**  IF  he  had  not  been  born."  ^ 

On  this  passage  my  opponent,  with  ^reat  confidence,  re- 
peatedly challenges  me  to  meet  him.  The  fullowing  are  his 
words,  viz.  "I  am  willing  to  take  the  person  and  character 
*•  of  the  traitor  Judas,  as  the  entire  subject  of  the  debate,  to 
*'  decide  the  question  under  discussion  ;  and  if  my  opponent 
**  can  prove  that  Judas  is  to  be  eternally  miserable,  I  admit 
**  that  he  proves  his  doctrine ;  but  if  I  prove  from  the  testi- 
"  raony  of  the  inspired  writers,  that  there  is  as  much  reason 
'*  to  believe  he  will  be  saved,  as  there  is  to  believe  that  any 
"  of  the  other  disciples  will  be  saved,  then  he  has  lost  the  ar- 
'*  gument.  [f  my  opponent  will  not  meet  me  on  this,  or  on 
*'  any  other  argument,  you,  my  hearers,  will  say  it  is  because 
"  he  dare  not."  **  I  am  not  ashamed  to  appear  before  this 
"  audience  as  the  advocate  for  the  final  salvation  of  even 
**  Judas,  and  if  I  am  notable  to  prove  that  we  have  the  same 
**  reason  for  believing  in  his  final  and  eternal  happiness,  as 
"  we  have  to  believe  in  the  salvation  of  Peter  or  oi   Paul,  I 

a  Rev.iii.  20.    2  Tim.  ii.  21.  Matt.  xxiv.  24.     1  Cor.  x.  1?.  9.  27.     Heb.  xii, 
15—17,  25.     Jer.  iv.  4.  17.  27.  21.  12.  Am.  5.  6. 
b  Matt.  xxvi.  24. 


IDG 

"  must  give  up  lo  my  opponent,  ami  acknowledge  l>e  lias 
"  gained  his  ar<;uinent.  1  must  have  the  same  hope  for  tlie 
'•  salvation  nl  .liulas  as  I  have  lor  my  own,  or  mv  faith  in  uni- 
"•  versal  salvation  is  without  foundation.  Could  1  not  prove 
"  from  the  testimony  of  the  scriptures  that  Judas  is  finally  to 
•'  be  saved,  I  tell  you,  my  hearers,  I  could  not  so  boldly  ad- 
"  vocate  the  doctrine  of  universal  redemption  ;  upon  thesal- 
"  vation  of  Judas,  therefore,  I  rest  the  truth  of  my  doctrine. 
'"  Judas,  we  acknowledge,  Mas  guilty,  he  was  a  traitor  ;  but 
*'  show  me  the  law  which  requires  that  he  should  be  endless- 
*'  ly  miserable,  that  is,  punished  to  an  absolute  eternity  for 
"■  what  he  did."* 

In  the  above  challenges,  my  opponent  seems  confident  that 
Judas  is  as  safe  as  any  other  Apostle,  but  at  other  times,  he 
appears  to  think  him  much  safer  than  one  of  them.  One 
would  almost  think  that  he  was  afraid  of  Peter's  being  lost, 
because  he  was  so  much  more  hard-hearted  And  impenitent 
than  his  beloved  Judas.  The  following  are  his  words,  viz. 
*' There  is  nothing  in  the  whole  history  of  Judas,  that  should 
'•  cause  us  to  suppose  he  will  never  be  saved.  It  salvation 
**  be  predicated  on  repentance,  we  have  the  same  evidence, 
"  yea,  if  possible,  better  evidence  of  the  repentance  of  Judas, 
"  than  we  have  of  the  repentance  of  Peter.  The  one  betrays 
''  hih  master,  the  other  denies  him  :  but  what  does  Judas 
"  when  he  finds  his  master  is  in  the  hands  of  his  enemies  ? 
'■'  Does  he,  like  l^eter,  cowardly  deny  him,  with  imprecations 
"  and  curses  i  No,  he  comes  forward  to  the  enemies  of  his 
*'  Lord,  and  declares  that  he  had  sinned  in  that  he  '  had  be- 
''  trayed  innocent  blood.*  He  acknowledges  and  repents  of 
*'  his  guilt,  and  b-ars  honorable  testimony  to  the  innocence 
"  of  Jesus.  But  the  priests,  having  obtained  their  end,  in 
*■'  the  apprehension  of  our  Lord,  care  not  tor  this  confession, 
"  but  they  say,  '  M  hat  is  that  to  us  ?  See  thou  to  that.'  Does 
'*  Judas  rest  contented,  saying,  well,  1  have  got  the  money, 
*■•  and  what  1  ha«-e  done  cannot  now  be  undone?  No,  he  des- 
"  pises  his  ill-gutteu  gain  ;  *he  cast  down  the  pieces  of  sil- 
*'  ver'  at  the  feet  of  the  priests,  and  went  out,  and  *was  suf- 
"  focated  with  grief.'  I  know  that  our  common  version  of 
••'  the  scri;.pture.s,  stiys,  *•  he  went  and  hanged  himself;*  but 
''  it  is  the  part  of  my  opponent  to  prove  that  this  is  the  mean- 
"  ing-  of  the  original,  which  he  cannot  do.  How  is  the  idea 
''  of  his  having  hanged  himself  recoucileable  with  the  account 
*'  given  in  the  book  of  Aits,  of  the  death  of  Judas  .^  *  Fall- 

a  Minutes,  i>.  p.  77,  90.  ■■'' 


197 

'^  iiig  headlong,  he  burst  asunder  in  the  midst,  and  all  his 
''  bowels  gushed  out.*  Acts  i.  IS.  The  learned  Mr.  AYake- 
''•  field,  who  was  no  Universalist,  translates  the  passage, 
** '  Then  he  threw  down  the  pieces  of  silver  in  the  temple, 
**  and  withdrew  :  and  after  his  departure,  was  choaked  with 
'''  anguish:'  and  that  excessive  grief  will  produce  this  eflect, 
"  all  who  know  any  thing  of  the  effects  of  the  passions  on 
"  the  body,  must  acknowledge.  I  would  now  ask,  have  we 
"  as  much  evidence  of  the  sincerity  of  the  repentance  of  those 
"  who  come  forward  in  our  days,  and  declare  themselves  to 
"  be  such  great  sinners  in  the  sight  of  God  and  man  I  Do 
*'  they  make  restitution  in  those  instances  in  which  they  have 
**  injured  their  brother  ?  I  do  sincerely  wish  that  we  had  the 
*'  same  evidence  of  the  sincere  repentance  of  christians,  in 
*'  our  day,  as  we  have  of  the  sincerity  of  Judas,  when  '  he  re- 
'*  pented  him,  and  brought  again  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver 
**  to  the  chief  priests  and  elders.'  Matt,  xxvii.  35.  Let  my 
*•'  opponent,  now,  if  he  feels  himself  able,  meet  me  on  this 
*'  ground."* 

In  the  above  effusion,  my  Universalist  opponent  tries  his 
talents  for  criticism.  The  following  effort  in  the  same  way, 
is  in  his  own  words,  viz.  "  The  original  text  is  ambiguous  : 
**  it  is  literally  '  good  were  it  for  him,  if  that  man  were  not 
"  born.'  It  will  admit  of  the  following  constructions,  *  Good 
**  were  it  for  him  (the  Son  of  man)  if  that  man  (the  traitor) 
"  were  not  born,'  Or,  *  good  were  it  for  him  (the  traitor)  if 
*'  that  man  (the  Son  of  Man)  were  not  born.'  Or,  (what  is 
*'  more  probably  the  true  sense)  *  good  were  it  for  him  (the 
"  traitor)  if  that  man  (the  traitor)  were  not  born.'  Or,  lastly, 
*'  (which  is  nearly  the  same  in  sense)  *  good  were  it  for  him, 
"  (the  traitor)  if  he  were  not  born  that  man.'  But  '  good 
**  were  it  for  that  man  (the  traitor)  if  he  had  never  been  born,' 
^*  (that  is,  never  existed^  is  a  construction  that  the  words 
**  will  not  possibly  bear.  To  prove  this  statement  true,  I 
**'  have  only  to  refer  to  a  passage  where  similar  expressions 
"  occur  in  the  original.  It  is  recorded  in  the  book  of  Acts, 
'*  chapter  seven,  that  Stephen  made  an  address  to  his  accu- 
"  sers,  in  which  he  gives  a  history  of  all  the  great  things 
«  which  God  had  done  for  his  people  in  former  times,  from 
•'  the  time  when  he  appeared  unto  *  our  father  Abiaham, 
"  when  he  was  in  Mesopotamia,  before  he  dwelt  iu  Char- 
"  ran ;'  when  he  comes  to   speak  of  Moses,  he  says,  *  at 

%  Minnies,  p.  p.  92,  95.      ^^ 


198 

''  wliicli  time  Moses  was  born,  sv  w  xai^u  sytwrfiri  Mwutfiis,' 
*'  where  tbe  same  verb,  s^swYi^y],  translated  *  was  born'  occurs 
'*  in  the  text  in  reference  to  Judas,  *  e»  oux  syswriori  o  av^ewn'og/ 
"  excepting  that  in  the  one,  the  idiom  of  our  language  requires 
"  that  it  should  be  rendered  in  the  indicative,  and  in  the 
*'  other,  being  preceded  by  the  conjunction  si  If,  in  tbe  sub- 
'•  junctive  mood.  Now  what  is  the  difference  between  these 
"  two  passages?  The  only  difference  is,  that  tbe  latter  has 
"  the  modifying  particles  £i.  translated  if,  and  the  negative 
"  oux  notf  which,  however,  do  not  alter  the  meaning  of  the 
"  verb,  which  is  precisely  the  same  in  both.  Now  if  the 
"  verb  sysw^^r}  in  the  former,  express  tbe  natural  birth  of 
"  Moses,  by  what  mode  of  reasoning  can  we  cause  oux  gy£vv»i6»] 
•'  in  the  latter  to  signify  absolute  non-existence  ?  That  these 
*"*  statements  are  liierally  true  I  appeal  to  our  judges,  and  to 
"  all  learned  men.  If  I  am  wrong  let  me  be  contradicted. — 
•*  Thus,  you  see,  ends  the  discussion  in  relation  to  the  dis- 
'*  pute  on  the  meaning  of  the  passage  in  reference  to  Judas. 
•■'  Even  my  opponent  dare  not  dispute  the  correctness  of  my 
**  statement.  \_Here  Mr.  Kennedy,  the  second  of  Mr.  M''CaUaf 
"  one  of  the  bench,  arose  and  commenced  some  remarks  hut 
"  was  silenced  hy  Mr.  M''CaUa.'\  You  see  my  hearers,  that 
"  his  friend  would  have  looked  into  the  passage,  but  ray  op- 
"•  ponent  shrinks  from  the  decision  ;  and  you  now  see  how 
"  we  stand  on  the  subject  to  which  1  have  called  his  atten- 
"  tion,  and  on  which  I  am  perfectly  willing  to  rest  this  dis- 
"  cussion.'-* 

In  the  same  strain  my  Universalist  opponent  speaks  as 
follows,  viz.  "  The  phrase  in  relation  to  Judas,  is  '  xaXov  i^v 
"  ajToj  £1  oux  zyivvri'^r\  o  ave^wTog  sxsivog,  good  were  it  for  that  man 
"  if  he  had  not  been  born.'  \ly  opponent  says  that  the  true 
*'  meaning  is  'good  were  it  for  Judas  if  he  had  never  had 
"  any  existence^'  Now  I  ask,  if  Judas  had  never  had  a  be- 
"  ing,  could  any  thing  have  been  good  for  him  ?  Could  any 
"  thing  be  good  for  you,  my  hearers,  if  you  had  never  been 
"  brought  into  existence  ?  The  idea  of  any  thing  being  good 
"  for  Judas,  implies  in  itself  that  he  must  have  had  a  beiug."l» 

He  reasons  at  another  time  in  the  loUowing  words,  viz 
"  T  am  willing  to  rest  the  salvation  on  the  plain  testimony  of 
"  God.     This  testimony,  it  is  true,  declares  that  'by  trans- 
"  gression  Judas  fell,  that  he  might  go  to  his   own  place.* 
"  Acts  i.  25.     But  my  opponent  must  prove  that  this  place 

ft  Minutes,  p.  p.  89,  90. 
b  Minutes,  p.  78. 


199 

"  is  a  place  of  endless  misery.  What  says  Jpsus  to  his  clis- 
"  ciples  ?  *  ye  which  have  followed  me  in  the  regeneration, 
*'  when  the  Sou  of  man  shall  sit  on  the  throne  of  his  glory, 
"  ye  also  shall  sit  upon  twelve  thrones,  judging  the  twelve 
**  tribes  of  Israel.'  Matt.  xix.  28.  Let  the  time  referred  to 
*'  here,  be  when  it  may,  the  promise  was  made  to  the  twelve 
"  when  Judas  constituted  one  oi  them.  It  will  not  do  to  say, 
*'  that  the  promise  can  be  fulfilled  by  supplying  the  place  of 
"  Judas  by  Matthias,  who  was  elected  after  the  ascension  of 
"  our  Lord.  The  promise  was  made  to  that  twelve  to  whom 
"  Christ  spake,  *ye  who  have  followed  me,'  and  that  the  tes- 
"  timonies  should  be  true,  to  them  it  must  be  fulfilled.  If 
*'  my  opponent  feels  disposed  to  dispute  all  this,  he  is  at 
**  liberty,  and  I  hope  I  shall  be  able  to  meet  his  argn- 
"  ments."a 

Mr.  Winchester's  mode  of  evading  the  force  of  this  rigid 
authority,  differs  from  that  of  my  opponent.  He  thinks  our 
Saviour's  declaration  conceniiiig  Judas  equivalent  to  those 
of  Job  and  Jeremiah  conrei'iiing  themselves.  They  cursed 
the  day  in  which  they  were  born,  thinking  that  non  exist- 
ence was  preferable  to  such  an  existence  as  theirs.  He  un- 
derstands this  to  be  the  meaning  of  our  Saviour  with,  regard 
to  Judas;  that  non-existance  is  preferable  to  such  an  exist- 
ence as  his.  This  author  agrees  in  his  calmer  moments, 
with  the  hasty  and  improper  decision  of  Job  and  Jeremiah, 
that  annihilation  is  preferable  even  to  these  comparatively 
light  afflictions  which  are  but  for  a  moment.  He  speaks 
as  follows,  viz.  "  And  who  would  not,  a  thousand  times, 
•'  choose  rathej*  never  to  have  been  born,  than  even  to  see, 
**  far  less  experience,  the  miseries  which  came  upon  Jerusu- 
"  lem  and  its  inhabitants  ?  Would  it  not  have  been  better 
*'  for  mothers  never  to  have  been  horn,  than  to  have  killed 
*•  and  eaten  their  own  children  in  the  siege?  and  would  it 
"  not  have  been  better  for  the  children  never  to  have  been 
"born,  than  to  have  been  food  for  their  mothers ?" i^  He 
might  as  well  have  asked,  was  not  annihilation  preferable 
to  the  martyrdom  of  Ignatius  and  many  others,  who  were 
food  for  lions  ?  Surely  not:  because  these  martyrs  inherit 
that  everlasting  glory  which  Mr.  Winchester  vainly  expects 
for  the  devoted  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem.  If  they  were  ever 
to  attain  this  eternal  Joy,  it  is  well  for  them  to  have  been 
born,  if,  between  their  birth  and  their  glorification,  they  had 

a  Minntes,p.  91. 
b  Dialosue  2nd. 


20U 

to  endure  ten  thousand  sieges  of  Jerusalem.  The  infinite 
superiority  of  endless  happiness  over  temporary  pain  shews 
the  rashness  of  the  complaints  and  wislies  of  the  inspii-ed 
mourners  ahove  mentioned.  But  was  our  Saviour  rash  ? 
Was  he  under  the  influence  of  ignorance,  impatience,  or  rc- 
sentment.  when  after  weighing  the  good  and  the  evil  of  this 
tiaitor's  career,  he  declared  that  anniliilation  was  prefera- 
hle  to  such  an  existence  I  ''  It  had  heen  good  for  that  man  if 
"  he  had  not  been  born." 

After  having  rejected  our  translation,  and  amused  tiie  au- 
dience with  a  great  variety  of  translations,  my  opponent  at 
last  agrees  that  the  passage  means,  ''good  were  it  for  him, 
**  (the  traitor,)  if  that  man,  (the  traitor,)  were  not  born."  The 
result,  then,  of  his  pedantic  criticisms  is  this ;  that  lie  has 
given  us  a  translation  agreeing  with  our  own,  and  has  ac- 
companied it  with  a  paraphrase  which  establishes  our  inter- 
pretation !  "  Good  w^ere  it  for  him,  (the  traitor,)  if  that  man, 
"  (^the  traitor,)  were  not  born."  It  would  be  good  for  Judas, 
if  he  were  not  born  :  that  is,  if  he  were  in  a  state  of  non-ex- 
istence as  he  was  before  his  birth.  It  is  true  that  a  state  of 
non-existence  has  no  positive  good  attending  it  j  but  is  it  not 
grammatical,  intelligible  and  scriptural,  to  say  tijat  annihila- 
tion would  be  comparatively  a  blessing  to  that  maji.  to  whom 
existence  is  a  curse  ?  Yet  this  sort  of  language  my  oppo- 
nent endeavours  to  shew  is  inconsistent  with  sound  philoso- 
phy, and  the  usages  of  Greek  w  riters.  He  would  have  us  be- 
lieve  that  the  fact  of  Moses,  being  6or«,  means  the  same  thing 
as  a  supposition  that  Judas  is  not  born,  because  the  woi*d 
horn  is  used  in  both  cases.  He  admits  thattlic  one  is  an  af- 
firmative and  the  other  a  negative :  and  yet  by  quoting  a 
great  deal  of  Greek,  and  using  many  grammatical  terms,  he 
calculates  on  making  you  believe  that  a  fact  and  a  supposi- 
tion, an  affirmative  and  a  negative,  mean  the  same  thing. 
"  Now  what  is  the  ditfcrence  between  these  two  passages?" 
he  gravely  asks.  I  know  not  how  to  do  justice  to  his  learn- 
ing and  his  powers  of  reasoning,  better  tlian  by  putting  his 
argument  into  a  syllogistic,  and  almost  a  poetical  form. 

Major  proposition,     syswrj^v]  Mutu(ir\£=  si  oux  syswrjAig  6  avi^oi^oi 

Minor  proposition.  Indicative,  Subjunctive,  Original, 
Particles,  Idiom. 

Conclusion.  Therefore,  to  be  born,  and  not  to  be  born, 
both  presuppose  existence,  and  mean  the  same  thing,  accord- 
ing to  the  philosophy  of  the  Universal ists. 


201 

If  the  mere  use  of  the  same  verb  in  relation  to  Moses  and 
Judas,  will  authorize  such  a  wild  conclusion,  then  it  is  as 
true,  that  Jonah  sivaUoweU  the  fFhale,  as  that  the  f^Vhale 
swalloived  Jonah,  because  not  only  the  same  verb  but  the 
saine  words  tln-oughout  occur  in  both  these  pi-opositions. 

When  the  Scriptures  declare  tliat  *'  by  transgression  Ju- 
«  das  fell,  that  he  might  go  to  his  own  place,"  '^  my  opponent 
says  tliat  his  own  place  is  one  of  those  twelve  thrones  on 
which  the  Apostles  shall  Judge  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel. 
He  considers  his  right  to  this  glory  secured  to  him  by  the 
unconditional  promise  of  Christ  j  and  that  veracity  requires 
that  lie  be  enthroned. 

It  is  freely  admitted  that  veracity  requires  the  fulfilment 
•f  every  projnise,  as  it  certainly  docs  the  execution  of  every 
threat.     But  where  do  we  find  a  promise  that  Judas  shall 
inherit  a  crown  of  glory,  with  or  without  regeneration,  re- 
pentance, or  faith  ?     The  promise  referred  to,  in  Matt.  xix. 
28,  is  so  far  from  being  unconditional,  that  it  expressly  con- 
fines the  benefits  promised,  to  those  who  had  forsaken  all, 
and  followed  him,"  in  the  regeneration."  "  Then  answered 
<"' Peter  and  said  unto  him,  behold  !  we  have  forsaken  all,  and 
^^ folio  wed  thee:  what  shall  we  have,  therefore?  And  Jesus 
"said  unto  them,  verily  I  say  unto  you,  that  ye  which  have 
**  followed  me,  in  the  regeneration,  when  the  Son  of  man  shall 
«  sit  in  the  throne  of  his  glory,  ye  also  shall  sit  upon  twelve 
«  thrones,  judging  tlie  twelve  tribes  of  Israel."     Here  the  en- 
quiry is  made,  not  concerning  uubelievers  and  traitors,  but 
concerning  self-denied  and  faithful  disciples.     The  promise 
wiiich  the  answer  contains,  describes  the  same  characters, 
«  ye  which  have  followed  me  in  the  regeneration."     That 
regeneration  is  essential  to  entering  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
our  Saviour  has  expressly  declared.b  That  Judas  was  born 
again,  at  the  time  when  this  promise  was  given,  will  not 
probably  be  contended  ;  and  it  will  soon  be  seen  that  he  had 
no  saving  interest  in  the  Christian  dispensation,  which  some 
will  understand  by  regeneration.     That  he  Imd  not  forsaken 
all,  is  evident  from  the  reason  which  is  given  for  his  recom- 
mending that  the  ointment  be  sold,  and  the  money  given  to 
the  poor.     "This  he  said,  not  that  he  cared  for  the  poor  j 
but  because  he  was  a  thief,  and  had  the  bag,  and  bare  what 
was  put  therein."*     This  also  makes  it  plain  that  he  had 
not  followed  Christ:  for  he  could  not  serve  God  and  Mam- 

a  Acts.  i.  25.  b  In.  iii.  3,  5. 

c  In.  xli.  6. 


202 

mon.  That  he  followed  the  devil  instead  of  Christ  is  mani- 
fest fi'om  scripture  prophecy  and  history.  Peter  '^  refers  us 
to  a  Psalm  which  says,  concerning  him,  *•  let  Satan  stand  at 
•*his  right  hand."  Peter,  in  quoting  a  part  of  this  Psalm, 
the  whole  of  which  relates  to  Judas,  says,  "this  scripture 
*'  must  needs  have  been  fulfilled,  which  the  Holy  Ghost,  by 
*'the  mouth  of  David,  spake  concerning  Judas,  which  was 
"  guide  to  them  that  took  Jesus."  As  a  fulfilment  of  the 
above  scripture,  it  is  expressly  stated  that  '*  Satan  entered 
"  into  him :"  ^  and  our  Saviour  himself  says  to  these  twelve 
Apostles,  to  whose  persons  identically  and  universally  my 
opponent  says  the  promise  was  made ;  to  these  twelve  he 
says,  "  one  of  you  is  adevil.''«5  Did  he  afterward  pi'omise 
that  this  devil  should  be  enthroned  as  a  judge  of  hispcoj)le? 
That  very  scripture  which  was  fulfilled  in  his  diabolical  pos- 
session, declared  that,  instead  of  judging  Israel,  he  himself 
should  be  judged  and  condemned  ;  and  that  instead  of  being 
enthroned  as  an  Apostle,  anotlier  sliould  take  that  office  from 
whicji  he  fell  by  transgression.  David  says,  *'  When  he 
"  shall  be  judged  let  him  be  condemned  ;  and  let  his  prayer 
*'  become  sin.  Let  his  days  be  few ;  and  let  another  take  his 
"office."  After  the  death  of  Judas,  and  the  ascension  of 
Christ,  Peter  says,  "  it  is  written  in  the  book  of  Psalms,  let 
*'  his  habitation  be  desolate,  and  let  no  man  dwell  therein  : 
'*  and  his  bishopric  let  another  take."  Accordingly,  the 
Apostles  pray  God  to  appoint  a  successor,  "  that  he  may 
*'  take  part  of  this  ministry  and  Apostleship,  from  which  Ju- 
**  das  by  transgression  fell,  that  he  might  go  to  his  own 
*'  place."  d  To  his  own  place  !  Is  heaven  tliat  place,  as  my 
opponent  says  ?  "  How  art  thou  fallen  from  heaven,  0  Lu- 
'*  cifer,  son  of  the  morning  !"  Judas  is  not  called  a  son  of  the 
mojning,  but  heis  called  *'  a  son  of  perdition;"  and  of  course, 
perdition  with  Lucifer,  is  his  own  place.  *'  The  transgres- 
"  sors  shall  be  destroyed  together  c  ''  Judas  by  iransgres- 
**  sion  fell."  "  The  wicked  shall  he  cut  oif  from  the  earth,  and 
**i\\Q^^  transgressors  shall  be  rooted  ont  ofit."f  Task  not 
whether  he  was  rooted  out  of  the  earth  by  involuntary  suf- 
focation, voluntary  strangulation,  or  precipitation  from  the 
top  of  a  rock.  Certain  it  is,  as  my  opponent  acknowledges, 
that  "  falling  headlong,  he  burst  asunder,  and  all  his  bow- 
*'  els  gushed  out :"  and  it  is  no  less  certain  that  this  was 

a  Acts  i.  16,  20.  d  Ps.  cix.  7.  8,    Acts  i.  20,  25. 

b  In.  xiii.  27.  e  Ps.  xxxvii.  38. 

c  John  vi  r©.  f  Piov.  ii.  23, 


203 

predicted  as  an  introduction  to  a  place  of  cursing  and  not  of 
blessing.  "  As  he  loved  cursing,  so  let  it  come  unto  him  :  as 
**  he  delighted  not  in  blessing,  so  let  it  be  far  from  him.  As 
*'  he  clothed  himself  with  cursing,  like  as  with  his  garment, 
"  so  let  it  come  into  his  bowels  like  watery  and  like  oil  into  his 
"  bones."a  What  is  the  proper  place  of  a  fallen  star  but  with 
those  "  wandering  stars,  to  whom  is  reserved  the  blackness 
"  of  darkness  forever  ?"  b  If  Tophet  be  the  proper  place  of  a 
thief  and  traitor; — if  perdition  be  the  proper  place  of  a  "  son 
"  of  perdition;"— and  if  hell  be  the  proper  place  of  "  a  devil  ;* 
—then  it  is  plain  where  this  most  conspicuous  of  hypocrites 
went,  when  he  went  "  to  his  own  place." 

But  my  opponent  says,  *' if  salvation  be  predicated  on  re- 
"pentance,  we  have  the  same  evidence,  yea,  if  possible,  better 
«  evidence  of  the  repentance  of  Judas,  than  we  liave  of  the 
«  repentance  of  Peter."  Doubtless  my  opponent  has  read 
Campbell's  preliminary  dissertation  on  the  word  repentance, 
and  has  observed  that  the  Scriptures  generally  use  one  word* 
to  signify  evangelical  repentance^  which  is  the  work  of  the 
Spirit  of  sanctification,  and  another  word^  to  denote  that 
regret  which  is  no  way  inconsistent  with  the  most  depraved 
disposition.  In  the  Septuagint,  it  is  used  to  denote  the  ma- 
lignant chagrin  of  the  Moabites,  on  being  conquered  by  the 
Israelites.  *'  And  there  was  great  repentance  against  Isra- 
el." In  the  Apocryjjha,  its  conjugate  is  used  to  mark  that 
repentance  «  which  devoted  sinners  exercised"  for  having  once 
performed  their  duty.  '*  As  for  the  ungodly,  wrath  came  up- 
on them  without  mercy  unto  the  end ;  for  he  knew  before, 
what  they  would  do  :  how  that  having  given  them  leave  to 
depart,  and  sent  them  hastily  away,  they  would  repent  and 
pursue  them."  In  the  Septuagint,  it  is  used  to  denote  that 
sorrow  which  the  children  of  Israel  felt  for  having  left 
Egypt.  '*  For  God  said,  lest  peradventure  the  people  re- 
pent  when  they  see  war,  and  they  return  to  Egypt"  It  is 
also  used  to  point  out  the  final  and  irremediable  sorrow  of  the 
despisers  of  God's  word  and  ordinances.  "  And  thou  repent 
at  the  last,  when  thy  flesh  and  thy  body  are  consumed  « 

That  Judas'  repentance  was  of  this  sort  is  evident  from 
the  fact  that  his  remorse  was  unavailing.  He  was  condemned 
and  degraded  by  divine  authority.  «  For  it  is  written  in  the 
book  of  Psalms,  « let  his  habitation  be  desolate,  and  let  no 

a  Ps.cix.17,  18.  b  Jude  xiii. 

e  2  Kgs.  iii.  27,    WSsd.  xix.  9.    Ex.  xiii.  17.    Prov.  v.  U. 


i!04 

inau  dwell  therein :  and  his  bishopric  let  another  take." 
Another  was  accordingly  appointed,  to  "take  part  of  this 
**  ministry  and  apostleship,  from  which  Judas  by  transgres- 
"  sion,  fell.*'a  If  he  sincerely  repented,  why  was  he  thus 
disgraced  ?  God  has  said,  "  If  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is 
"  faithful  and  just  to  for  give  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us 
"  from  all  unrighteousness.''^  Accordingly  Peter  was  for- 
given, and  was  never  deposed  from  his  office,  either  living  or 
dying.  Although  he  is  not  near  so  amiable  a  character  as 
Judas,  in  the  view  of  my  opponent,  yet  before  another  judge, 
he  was  far  more  lovely.  Was  it  ever  said  that  he  fell  from 
his  office  by  transgression,  thathc  might  go  to  his  own  place? 
His  heart  was  set  upon  tlie  place  where  Christ  is,  and  thither 
Christ  had  promised  that  he  sliould  go.  On  his  repentance, 
he  was  immediately  forgiven,  and  at  his  death  he  was  imme- 
diately glorified.  If  Judas  had  repented  sincerely,  the  same 
would  have  been  true  concerning  him.  It  would  therefore 
haveJbeen  exceedingly  good  for  him  to  have  been  born,  if  his 
life  of  suffering  here  had  been  prolonged  to  millions  of  ages. 
But  now  it  is  said,  according  to  my  opponent's  translation 
and  paraphrase,  "  Good  were  it  for  him  (the  traitor)  if  that 
man  (the  traitor)  were  not  born."  Was  this  ever  said  of 
Peter  ?  or  could  it  be  said  of  him  with  truth  ?  It  may  be  said 
witii  truth,  that  no  possible  degree  of  suffering,  howsoever 
protracted,  can  make  it  good  for  a  man  not  to  have  beem 
born,  if  that  suffering  be  succeeded  by  eternal  happiness  ; — 
But  infallible  wisdom  and  veracity  have  declared,  "  It  had 
been  good  for  that  man  if  he  had  not  been  born ;" — There- 
fore his  punishment  is  absolutely  eternal. 

Tlie  evidence  of  Judas'  condemnation  to  the  torments  of 
hell  is  so  overwhelming,  that  Mr.  Winchester,  however  re- 
luctantly, admitted  it;  although  he  \a\u\y  supposed  that  his 
punishment  in  hell  would  not  be  absolutely  eternal.  The 
following-  extract  will  show  his  sentiments,  viz.  "  If  such  a 
"  man  fas  Job]  had  reason  to  say  *  wherefore  then  hast  thou 
"  brought  me  forth  out  of  the  womb?  O  that  I  had  given  up 
"  the  ghost,  and  no  eye  had  seen  me !  I  should  have  been  as 
"  though  I  had  not  been ;  I  should  have  been  carried  from 
"  the  womb  to  the  grave,'  (see  Job  x.  18,  19,)  with  what 
'*  amazing  propriety  might  Christ  say  of  Judas,  the  traitor, 
"  who  sinned  in  such  a  dreadful  manner,  and  had  such  hor- 
••  rible  guilt  on  his  conscience  :  who  died  in  black  despair^. 
"  perished  in  such  an  awful  situation,  in  his  sins,  and,proba- 

a  Acts  i  20.2.7.  ),  i  John  i.  9. 


205 

*'  biy,  by  his  own  hands,  who  suffered  the  most  violent  agi- 
'*  tations  of  mind,  died  under  the  power  of  the  horrid  sugges- 
"  tions  of  the  great  enemy  of  men,  without  one  smile  or  hiok. 
^'  of  forgiveness,  from  Jesus,  or  even  daring  to  seek  it ; 
"  whose  sorrow  in  this  life  far  exceeded  Job's,  (for  Job  had 
"  no  sense  of  guilt,  treason,  and  ingratitude;  nor  was  he 
**  filled  with  rage,  blasphemy  and  despair)  and  who  mustpro- 
"  bably  have  his  portion  in  the  second  death  ; — [Well  may 
**  he  say  of  such  a  character,]  '  good  were  it  for  that  man  if 
'*  he  had  never  been  born  !'  even  upon  the  supposition  that 
'*  his  torments  are  not  designed  to  continue  while  God  ex- 

"  ists."a 

As  my  opponent  has  exhibited  a  great  anxiety  to  refer 
the  case  of  Judas  to  a  human  tribunal,  and  as  he  has,  with- 
out my  consent,  applied  to  th(^  moderators  for  their  decision, 
what  would  he  think  of  having  his  criticisms  and  arguments 
referred  to  Mr.  Winchester,  who,  as  well  as  my  opponent, 
may  be  considered  as  receiving  his  ordination  in  an  uninter- 
rupted line,  from  this  true  Universalist  Apostle.  My  oppo- 
nent says  that  the  original  "  words  will  not  possibly  bear" 
the  construction  "  good  were  it  for  that  man  (the  traitor)  if 
"  he  had  never  been  born."  Mr.  Winchester  uses  these  very 
words, "  good  were  it  for  that  man,  if  he  had  never  been 
"  born,*'  as  the  correct  translation,  and  in  the  very  meaning 
which  my  opponent  says  "  the  words  will  not  possibly  bear." 
In  his  day  Universalism  had  not  discovered,  that  a  suflBcient 
quantity  of  grammar  and  Greek  would  prove,  that  to  be  horiif 
and  not  to  be  born  meant  the  same  thing.  My  opponent 
would  persuade  you  that  when  Judas  passed  through  the 
dark  valley  and  shadow  of  death,  he  had  the  rod  and  staff  of 
his  heavenly  shepherd  to  comfort  him  ;  Mr.  Winchester  in- 
timates that  he  was  attended  by  a  very  different  character ; 
that  he  "  died  under  the  power  of  the  horrid  suggestions  of 
'*  the  great  enemy  of  men,  without  one  smile,  or  look  of  for- 
"  giveness,  from  Jesus,  or  even  daring  to  seek  it."  Not  so 
with  Peter.  My  opponent  would  urge  that  the  traitor  died  by 
excess  of  pious  grief;  Mr.  Winchester  admits  that  he  "  suffer- 
**  ed  the  most  violent  agitations  of  mind,"  and  that  this  arose 
from  "  horrible  guilt  on  his  conscience,*'  but  so  far  was  he 
from  believing  that  this  noted  convict  obtained  relief  from 
guilt,  and  was  filled  with  hope  and  love,  he  believed  that  he 
was  filled  with  ingratitude  and  *'  rage,  blasphemy  and  des- 
«  pair."     My  opponent  insists  that  he  died  a  true  penitent, 

a  Dialogue  2d. 


W6 

t-leansed  from  sin,  without  the  guilt  of  suicide,  and  that  he 
went  to  his  own  throne  of  glory,  and  not  to  his  own  place  of 
torment.  Mr  Winchester  believes  that  he  died  in  "  an  aw- 
•*  ful  situation,  in  his  sins,  and  probably  by  his  own  hands," 
"  and  must  probably  have  his  portion  in  the  second  death." 
Yes,  Mr.  Winchester  believes  that  this  traitor  lived  and  died 
without  an  interest  in  Christ  the  only  Saviour;  and  that  he 
probably  killed  himself,  and  that  he  will  probably  suffer  the 
punishment  of  his  crimes  in  that  hell  which  is  after  death. 
When  one  Universalist  ^a^/y  denies  the  truth,  it  is  pleasant 
to  hear  another  admit,  that  the  truth  is  probably  true. 

3.  Interrogation.  This  familiar  tigure  of  speech  differs 
from  a  simple  affirmation,  chiefly  in  its  being  a  more  anima- 
ted mode  of  expression.  The  doctrine  of  the  divine  omnipo- 
tence and  incomprehensibility,  and  of  the  pitiable  impotency, 
and  hereditary  depravity  of  man,  are  not  more  pointedly  as- 
serted by  the  most  direct  affirmation,  than  by  such  expres- 
sions as  the  following  ;  "  Is  the  Lord's  hand  waxed  short?'' 
"  Is  any  thing  too  hard  for  the  Lord  ?**  "  Canst  thou  by 
"  searching,  find  out  God  ?  Canst  thou  find  outthe  Almighty 
"  unto  perfection  T'  "  Can  the  Ethiopean  change  bis  skin,  or 
**  the  leopard  his  spots  .'"  "Who  can  bring  a  clean  thing  out 
**  of  an  unclean  ?  Not  one.''* 

Awainj  of  the  force  of  this  argument,  my  opponent  treats 
it  as  follows,  viz.  "  I  admit  the  force  of  a  statement,  by  way 
"  of  interrogation,  on  subjects  that  are  self-evident,  or,  arc 
*'not  disputed,  but  no  disputed  proposition,  it  is  evident,  can 
»<  be  settled  by  this  species  of  argument."''  This  view  of  the 
subject  is  quite  original.  If  correct,  it  would  make  a  great 
deal  of  the  Bible  as  worthless  as  waste  paper.  That  the 
views  and  wishes  of  writers  and  speakers,  inspired  and  un- 
inspired, in  relation  not  only  to  axioms,  but  to  matters  of  fact 
and  reasoning,  can  be  perspicuously  communicated  in  the 
form  of  interrogation,  is  so  obvious,  and  a  matter  of  such 
constant  experience,  that  courts  of  justice  have,  time  imme- 
morial, intei'posed  their  authority  to  prevent  attornies 
from  asking  leading  questions  to  witnesses ;  because 
these  questions  shew  how  the  party  wishes  them  an- 
swered. But  all  the  questions  in  the  Bible  shew  the  belief 
or  desire  of  him  who  asks  them ;  and  this  belief  or  desire  is 
communicated  in  the  interrogative  fot'm,  not  because  it  is 
equivocal,  but  because  it  is  the  very  contrary,  and  exhibits  the 

a  Num.  xj.  23.  Gen.  xviii.  14,  Job  xi,  7.  Jer.  xiii.  23.  Job  xJv.4. 
b  Minutes  p.  70. 


»  207 

sentiment  with  greater  force.  I  never  knew  this  principle 
denied  by  any  man  of  common  sense,  my  opponent  only  ex- 
cepted. Mr.  Ballon,  in  quoting;  the  question,*' how  can  ye 
escape  the  damnation  of  hell  V  declares  that  when  our  Sa- 
viour proposed  this  interrogatory  to  his  wicked  audience, 
**  he  pronounced  on  them  the  damnation  of  hell. "a  Thus,  ac- 
cording to  him,  and  according  to  every  man  who  understands 
language,  a  threat  or  prediction,  no  way  evident,  but  in- 
volving a  disputed  point,  may  be  unequivocally  pronounced 
in  the  form  of  interrogation. 

In  the  same  spirit  of  this  denunciation  of  our  Saviour,** 
Peter  says,  "if  the  righteous  scarcely  be  saved,  where  shall 
the  ungodly  and  the  sinner  appear  ?"  The  foi'egoing  ques- 
tion tells  us  that  they  will  appear  in  hell  ;  from  which  the 
impossibility  of  escaping  is  often  urged.  "  How  shall  wees- 
cape,  if  we  neglect  so  great  salvation  I"  God  says  by  Jere- 
miah, '*  How  shall  I  pardon  thee  for  this?"  Our  Saviour 
says, ''  What  is  a  man  advantaged  if  he  gain  the  whole  world, 
and  lose  himself,  or  be  cast  away  ?"  or  according  to  another 
Evangelist,  "  What  is  a  man  profited  if  he  gain  the  whole 
world,  and  lose  his  own  soul  ?  or  what  shall  a  man  give  in 
exchange  for  his  soul  ?"c 

The  only  subterfuge  which  my  opponent  is  observed  to 
use,  in  order  to  escape  the  last  authority,  is,  that  "  the  word 
here  rendered  soul,  is  rendered  life,  in  the  verse  immediately 
preceding. ■"'1  In  answer  to  this,  let  it  be  remarked  that  as 
the  soul  has  a  death  of  its  own,  so  has  the  soul  a  life  of  its 
own :  and  this  very  preceding  verse  is  directly  in  proof  that 
it  is  the  life  of  the  soul  that  is  here  meant.  "  For  whosoever 
"  will  save  his  [bodily]  life,  shall  lose  if,  [the  life  of  his  soul.] 
*'  and  whosoever  will  lose  his  [bodily]  life,  for  my  sake,  shall 
«  find  it,  [the  life  of  his  soul.]  For  what  is  a  man  profited 
*'  if  he  gain  the  whole  world,  and  lose  [the  life  of]  his  own 
'*  soul  ?  or  what  shall  a  man  give  in  exchange  for  [the  life 
"of]  his  soul?"  That  this  is  the  meaning  in  a  similar 
passage  of  Job^  is  plain.  "  For  what  is  the  hope  of  the  hy- 
«  pocrite,  though  he  hath  gained,  when  God  taketh  away 
"  his  soul?  Will  God  hear  his  cry,  when  trouble  cometh  up- 
"  on  him?  Will  he  delight  himself  in  the  Almighty?  will 
'<  he  always  call  upon  God  ?"    Universalism  answers  these 

a  Notes  on  parable  26th. 
b  Matt,  xxiii.  SS. 

c  Matt  xxiii.  33.    1  Peter  iv.  18.  Hebr.  ii.  S.  Jer-  v.  7.    Luke  ix.  25,  Matt,  x\'r. 
-*•  d  Minutes  n.  55. 

iC  xxTii  8, 10: 


208 

*■*  questions  in  one  way,  and  it  is  evident  that  God  intended 
♦*  them  to  be  answered  in  another.* 

THIRD  ORTHODOX  ARGUMENT. 

CUNTllAST. 

It  was  proposed  to  show  that  the  scriptures  mark  such  a 
contrast  between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked,  as  to  tlieir 
character,  standing,  and  future  destiny,  as  can  be  satisfacto- 
rily explained  on  no  other  ground  than  the  doctrine  of  the 
eternal  punishment  of  the  ungodly.  As  many  more  autho- 
rities must  be  quoted  here  than  in  the  last  argument,  time 
forbids  that  my  comments  should  be  frequent  or  copious : 
neither  will  it  be  of  any  use  to  repeat  several  passages  or 
their  parallels,  which  have  already  been  quoted  for  other 
purposes.^ 

The  distinction  between  Mount  Gerizzem  and  Mount 
Ebal  was  not  more  marked,  that  were  the  condition  and 
prospects  of  those  who  were  so  abundantly  blessed  from  the 
one,  and  those  who  were  cursed  from  the  other."^  *•  Behold 
"  I  set  before  you  this  day  a  blessing  and  a  curse :  a  blessing, 
"if  ye  obey  the  commandments  of  the  Lord  your  God,  which  I 
"command  you  this  day  ;  and  a  curse,  if  ye  will  not  obey 
"  the  commandments  of  the  Lord  your  God ;  but  turn  aside 
"out  of  the  way  which  I  command  you  this  day,  to  go  after 
**  other  Gods  wiiich  ye  have  not  known."d  *'  For  evil  doers 
'<  shall  be  cut  off:  but  those  that  wait  upon  the  Lord,  they 
"  shall  inherit  the  earth.  For  yet  a  little  while,  and  the  wick- 
*'ed  shall  not  be:  yea,  thou  shalt  diligently  consider  his 
"  place,  and  it  shall  not  be.*  But  the  meek  shall  inherit  the 
'<  earth  ;  and  shall  delight  themselves  in  the  abundance  of 
**  peace.  The  wicked  plotteth  against  the  just,  and  gnash- 
*<  eth  upon  him  with  his  teeth.  The  Lord  shall  laugh  at 
*Miim;  for  he  seeth  that  his  day  is  coming.  The  wicked 
« have  drawn  out  the  sword,  and  have  bent  their  bowj  to 
<*  cast  down  the  poor  and  needy,  and  to  slay  such  as  be  of 
*'  upright  conversation.    Their  sword  shall  enter  into  their 

a  Job  xi.  20, 36  :  18  .  Ps,  xix.  6,-9.  Hebr.  xii.  25. 

b  Luke  vi,  20,-26  2  Tim.  ii.  20, 21.  Ps.  xxii.  29,  Ez.  xvii.  24.  Gen,  xii.  3.  Ps. 
xvii.  14, 

c  Ueut,  Chapters  27  &  28. 

d  Deut.  11;  26—28. 

e  Neitlier  the  original  nor  the  translation  gives  any  countenance  to  the  opinion 
of  my  opponent  or  of  the  deslructionists,  that  there  shall  be  no  wicked  persons 
hereafter  ;  but  only  tliat  they  shall  be  brouq-ht  to  nought,  by  falling  from  a  high 
to  a  low  condition  ; by  suffering  the  disappointment  of  their  vain  expecta- 
tions ; — sind  receiving  the  puniihment  of  their  many  sins. 


209 

•^  oSvn  heai-t,  and  their  bows  shall  be  broken.     A  little  that 
"a  righteous  man  hatli,  is  better  than  the  riches  of  many 
'*  wicked.     For  the  arms  of  the  wicked  shall  be  broken  :  but 
"  the  Lord  upholdeth  the  righteous.     Tiie  Lord  knoweth  the 
*  days  of  the  upright :  and  their  inheritance  shall  be  fore- 
"  ver.     They  shall  not  be  ashamed  in  the  evil  time  :  and  in 
**  the  days  of  famine  tliey  shall  be  satisfied.     But  the  wick- 
"  ed  shall   perish,  and  the   enemies  of  the  Lord  shall  be  as 
"the  fat  of  lambs  :  they  shall  consume:  into  smoke  shall 
"they  consume  away.     The  wicked  bori'oweth  and  payetli 
"not  again:  but   the  righteous  shewcth  mercy  and  giveth. 
"  For  such  as  be  blessed  of  him  sliall  i)iherit  the  earth  ;  and 
"  they  that  be  cursed  of  him  shall  be  cut  off'."*     "  Shew 
"  thy  marvellous  loving  kindness,  O  thou  th.at  savest,  by  thy 
"riglit  hand  them  which  jnit  their  trust  in  tliee,  from  those 
"  that  rise  up  against  theiM."     *'  Arise  0  Lord  !  disapiwint 
"  him,  cast  him  down  :  deliver   my  soul   from  the  wicked, 
"  w  hich  is  thy  sword."     "  As  foi-  me,  I  will  behold  thy  face 
*'*  in  righteousness  j   1  shall  be  satisfied  when  I  awake,  with 
'*  thy  likeness.'"'*     "Do  they  not  err  that  devise  evil?  but 
•■*  mercy  and  truth  sliall  be  to  tiiem  that  devise  good."**     "  By 
•*  the  blessing  of  tlie  upriglit,  the  city    is  exalted  ;  but  it  is 
••  overthrown  by  the  mouth  of  the  wicked."«i     ^*  They  shall 
"be  ashamed,  and  also  confounded,  all  of  them:  they  shall 
"  go  to  confusion  together,  that  arc  makeis  of  idols.     But 
"  Israel  shall  be  saved  in  the  Lord  with  an  everlasting  sal- 
"  vation :  ye  shall  not  be  ashamed   nor  confounded,  world 
"  \\itliout  end."e     "  He  preserveth  not  the  life  of  the  wicked, 
"  but  giveth  right  to  the  poor."f    "  Envy  thou  not  the  op- 
"  pressor,  and  choose  none  of  his  ways  :  for  the  froward  is 
*'  abomination  to  the  Lord :   but  his  secret  is  with  the  righ- 
*'  teous.  The  curse  of  the  Lord  is  in  the  house  of  the  wicked  : 
"  but  he  blesscth  the  habitation  of  the  just.     Surely  he  scor- 
*'  neth  the  scorners :  but  he  giveth  grace  unto  the  lowly. 
*'The  wise  shall  inherit  glory:  but  shame  shall  be  the  pro- 
<'  motion  of  fools."g     "  Whosoever  heareth  tiiese  sayings  of 
"  mine,  and  doeth  them,  I  will  liken  him  unto  a  wise  man, 
"  which  built  his  house  upon  a  rock  ;  and  the  rain  descend- 
"  ed,  and  the  floods  came,  and  the  winds  blew,  and  beat  up- 
"  on  that  house,  and  it  fell  not ;  for  it  w^as  founded  upon  a 

a  Ps.  xxxvii.  9—22.  e  Is.  Ixv.  16,  17. 

b  Ps.  xvii.  7, 13,  15.  f  Job  xxxvi.  6. 

c  Prov.  xiv.  22.  g  Prov.  iii.  32 — 35. 
d  Prov.  xi.  11. 

Cc 


**  rock.  And  every  one  that  heareth  these  sayings  of  mine 
**  and  doeth  them  not,  shall  be  likened  unto  a  foolish  man' 
**  which  built  his  house  upon  the  sand  :  and  the  rain  descend* 
'*  ed,  and  the  floods  came,  and  the  winds  blew,  and  beat  up_ 
**  on  that  house,  and  it  fell ;  and  great  was  the  fiill  of  it."a 
*'  "  Who  then,  is  a  faithful  and  wise  servant,  w  horn  his  Lord 
*'  hath  made  ruler  oa  er  his  household,  to  give  them  meat  in 
•'  due  season  ?  Blessed  is  that  servant,  whom  his  Lord,  when 
"  he  Cometh,  shall  find  so  doing.  Verily  I  say  unto  you, 
"that  he  shall  make  him  ruler  over  all  his  goods.  But  and 
*' if  that  evil  servant  shall  say  in  his  heait,  my  Lord  delay- 
*'  eth  his  coming,  and  shall  begin  to  smite  his  fellow  servants, 
"and  to  eat  and  drink  witli  the  drunken;  the  Lord  of  that 
"  servant  shall  come  in  a  day  when  he  looketh  not  for  him, 
**  and  in  an  hour  that  he  is  not  aware  of,  and  shall  cut  him 
*'  asunder,  and  appoint  him  his  portion  with  the  hyjmcrites, 
"  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth."!^  "  Take, 
"  therefore,  the  talent  from  him,  and  give  it  unto  him  which 
*'  had  ten  talents.  For  unto  every  one  that  hath,  shall  be 
"given,  and  he  shall  have  abundance :  but  from  him  that 
"  hath  nut,  shall  be  taken  away  even  that  which  he  hath. 
*'  And  cast  ye  the  unprofitable  servant  into  outer  darkness: 
'*  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth."*^  •'  He  an- 
'*  sw  cred  and  said  unto  them,  because  it  is  given  unto  you  to 
**know  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  but  to  them 
**  it  is  not  given.  For  whosoever  hath,  to  him  shall  be  given, 
"  and  he  shall  have  more  abundance ;  but  whosoever  hath 
"  not,  from  him  shall  be  taken  away  even  that  he  liath."d 
*'  As  it  is  written,  Jacob  have  I  loved,  but  Esau  have  I 
**  hated."  "Therefore  hath  he  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have 
"  mercy,  and  whom  he  will,  hehardeneth."  "Hath  not  the 
**  potter  power  over  the  clay,  of  the  same  lump  to  make  one 
"vessel  unto  honor,  and  another  unto  dishonor?  What  if 
"  God,  willing  to  shew  his  wrath,  and  to  make  his  power 
**  known,  endured  with  much  long-suffering,  the  vessels  of 
"  w  rath  fitted  to  destruction ;  and  that  he  might  make  known 
"the  riches  of  ?,his  glory  on  the  vessels  of  mercy,  which  he 
** had  afore  piepared  unto  glo)*y."e  "  Thou  hast  hid  these 
"  things  from  the  wise  and  prudent,  and  hast  revealed  them 
"  unto  babes."f  *'  For  the  Lord  knoweth  the  way  of  the 
**  righteous :  but  the  way  of  the  ungodly  shall  perish."g  "  And 

a  Malt.vii.  24—27.  d  M«tt.  xiii.  11,  12. 

b  Matt.  xxiv.  45—51.  e  Rom.  ix    13,  18,  20—23. 

c  Mutt.  XXV.  28—31.  f  Matt.  i.  25. 

g  Ps.  i.  6. 


211 

<*  the  afflicted  people  thou  wilt  save :  but  thine  eyes  are  upon 
''  the  haughty,  that  thou  niayest  bring  them  tlown."a  "  For 
"  behold  the  day  conieth  that  shall  burn  as  an  oven;  and  all 
'^  the  prourl,  yea,  and  all  that  do  wickedly,  shall  be  stubble: 
^*  and  the  day  that  coineth  shall  burn  them  up,  saith  the  Lord 
••  of  Hosts,  that  it  shall  leave  them  neither  root  nor  branch. 
*'  But  unto  you  that  fear  my  name,  shall  the  Son  of  rightc- 
*.'  ousness  arise,  with  healing  in  his  wings ;  and  ye  shall  go 
*'  forth,  and  grow  up  as  calves  of  the  stall.  And  ye  shall 
*'  tread  down  the  wicked;  for  they  shall  be  ashes  under  the 
*'  soles  of  your  feet,  in  the  day  tliat  I  shall  do  this,  saith  the 
"  Lord  of  hosts."i>  "  And  I  will  feed  them  that  oppress  thee 
"  with  their  own  flesh,  and  they  shall  be  drunken  with  their 
**  own  blood,  as  with  sweet  wine.  And  all  flesh  shall  know 
*'  that  I,  the  Lord,  am  thy  Saviour,  and  thy  Redeemer,  tlie 
*'  Mighty  one  of  Jacob. "^  «  Rejoice  O  ye  nations  !  with 
*'  his  people  ;  for  he  will  avenge  the  blood  of  his  servants, 
**  and  will  render  vengeance  to  iiis  adversaries,  and  will  be 
♦*  merciful  unto  his  land,  and  to  his  people."d  «  Keeping  mer,- 
"  cy  for  thousands ;  forgiving  iniquity,  and  transgression, 
**  and  sin,  and  that  will  by  no  means  clear  the  guilt/."e 
"  "  But  if  ye  be  without  chastisement,  whereof  all  are  par- 
*'  takers,  then  are  ye  bastards  and  not  sons."^  "  The  king- 
•*  dom  of  heaven  is  like  unto  a  net  that  was  cast  into  the  sea, 
"  and  gathered  of  every  kind  :  which,  when  it  was  full,  they 
"  drew  to  shore,  and  sat  down,  and  gathered  the  good  into 
*'  vessels,  but  cast  the  bad  away.  So  shall  it  be  at  the  end  of 
"  the  world :  the  angels  shall  come  forth,  and  sever  the 
"  wicked  from  among  the  just ;  and  shall  cast  them  into  the 
« furnace  of  fire  :  there  shall  be  wailing  and  gnashing  of 
"  teeth."g  "  The  wicked  is  driven  away  in  his  wickedness; 
«  but  the  righteous  hath  hope  in  his  death."'^  "  The  Son  of 
**man  shall  send  forth  his  angels,  and  they  shall  gather  out 
"  of  his  kingdom  all  things  that  offend,  and  them  which  do 
•*  iniquity ;  and  shall  cast  them  into  a  furnace  of  fire  ;  there 
"shall  be  wailing  and  gnashing  of  teeth.  Then  shall  the 
"  righteous  shine  forth  as  the  Sun,  in  rhe  kingdom  of  their 
"Father."'  "  The  hope  of  the  righteous  shall  be  gladness ; 
**  but  the  expectation  of  the  wicked  shall  perish."J     "  An(l 


a  2  Sam.  xxii    28. 

f  Hebr.    xii.  8. 

b  Mai.  iv.  1—3. 

g  Matt   xiii.  47 — 50. 

Ik  Isa.  Ixix.  26. 

h  ProT.  xiv.  32. 

d  Deut.  xxxii.  43. 

i  Matt.  xiii.  41 — i.S, 

e  Ex.  xxxiv.  7. 

j  Prov.  X.  28. 

'2L2 

''  while  they  \vriit  to  buy,  the  bridegroom  came  ;  and  the> 
"  that  wei'c  ready  v.  ent  in  with  liim  to  the  marriage :  atjd 
"  the  door  was  shut.  Afterward  came  also  the  other  vir- 
"gins,  saying.  Lord,  Lord,  open  tons.  But  he  answered 
"  and  said,  verily  I  say  unto  you,  I  know  you  not."«  "  I 
"  create  the  fruit  of  the  lips;  peace,  peace,  to  him  that  is  far 
''  off,  and  to  him  that  is  near,  saith  the  Lord ;  and  I  will  heal 
"  him.  But  the  wicked  are  like  tlie  troubled  sea,  when  it 
"  cannot  rest,  whose  waters  cast  up  mire  and  dirt.  There 
"  is  no  peace,  saith  my  God,  to  the  wicked. "►'  "  For  the 
"preaching  of  the  cross  is  to  them  that  perish  foolishness  j 
*'  but  unto  us  who  are  saved,  it  is  the  power  of  God."<^  »*But 
"we  are  not  of  them  who  draw  back  unto  perdition;  but  of 
"  them  that  believe  to  the  saving  of  the  soul."d  <'  He  that 
"  believeth  on  the  Son,  hath  evej-lasting  life  ;  and  he  that  be- 
"  lieveth  not  the  Son,  shall  not  see  life ;  but  the  wrath  of 
"  God  abideth  on  liim."«  '*  And  the  nations  were  angry, 
"  and  thy  wrath  is  come,  and  the  time  of  the  dead,  that  they 
"  should  be  judged,  and  that  thou  shouldest  give  reward  un- 
"  to  thy  servants  the  prophets,  and  to  the  saints,  and  them 
"  that  fear  thy  name,  small  and  great :  and  shouldest  des- 
"  troy  them  w  hich  destroy  tlie  earth."^  "  And  there  shall  in  no 
**  wise  enter  into  it,  any  Ihing  that  dofileth.ncither  whatsoever 
"  worketh  abomination,  or  makcth  a  lie,  but  they  which  are 
"  written  in  the  Lamb's  book  of  life.",  "  Whose  fan  is  in  his 
'•hand,  and  he  will  thoioughly  jmige  his  floor,  and  gather  his 
**  wheat  into  the  garner;  but  lie  will  burn  up  the  chaft'with 
"  unquenchable  fire."^  "  The  men  of  Nineveh  shall  rise  in 
"judgment  with  tliis  generation,  and  shall  condemn  it :  be- 
*'  cause  they  repented  at  the  preacliing  of  Jonas  ;  and  be- 
**  hold,  a  gi-eater  tlian  Jonas  is  liere  !  The  queen  of  the 
"  south  shall  rise  up  in  the  judgment  with  this  generation, 
'*  and  shall  condemn  it :  for  she  came  from  the  uttermost 
'*  parts  of  the  earth,  to  hear  tlie  wisdom  of  Solomon;  and 
"  behold  a  greater  tlian  Solomon  is  here.  When  the  un- 
"  clean  spirit  is  gone  out  of  a  man,  he  walketh  through  dry 
*'  places,  seeking  rest,  and  findeth  none.  Then  he  saith,  I 
"  will  return  into  my  house  from  whence  I  came  out;  and 
"  when  he  is  come,  he  findeth  it  empty,  swept,  and  garnished. 
"Then  goeth  he,  and  taketh  with  himself  seven  other  spirit* 
''  more  wicked   than  himself,  and  they  enter  in  and  dwell 

a  Matt.  25;  10—1'-'.  e  In.  3;  36. 

b  I».  57;  19—21.  t"  Kov.  11;  18. 

c  1  Cor.'  1 ;  1 8.  z  •*'?''•  2» ;  27. 

rl  Heb.  1«;  3'J.  ')»  Matt.  3;  12. 


213 

"theiv:  and  the  last  state  of  that  man  is  worse  than  the 
"  tirst.  Even  so  shall  it  be  also  unto  this  wicked  genera- 
" tion.'*  " Let  deal h  seize  upon  tkem,  and  let  tkam  go 
"  down  quick  into  hell :  for  wickedness  is  in  their  dwellings, 
*'  and  among  them.  As  for  we,  I  will  call  u])on  God,  and 
'< the  Lord  shall  save  me"  ''Cast  thy  burden  upon  the 
"  Lord,  and  he  shall  sustain  thee  :  he  shall  never  suiFer  the 
*'  righteous  to  be  moved.  But  thou,  O  God  !  shalt  bring 
"  tliem  down  unto  the  pit  of  destruction  :  bloody  and  deceit- 
"  ful  men  shall  not  live  out  half  their  days;  but  I  will  trust 
*' in  thee."i>  "Who  will  render  to  every  man  accord- 
'<to  his  deeds;  to  them  who,  by  patient  continuance 
«  in  well  doing,  seek  for  glory,  and  honor,  and  immor- 
"tality;  eternal  life:  but  unto  them  that  are  conten- 
**  tious,  and  do  not  obey  the  truth,  but  obey  unrighteous- 
**  ncss,  indignation  and  wratli,  tribulation  and  anguish,  up- 
"  on  every  soul  of  man  that  doeth  evil,  of  the  Jew  first,  and 
«  also  of  the  Gentile.  But  glory,  honor,  and  peace,  to  every 
«  man  tiiat  worketh  good  ',  to  the  Jew  first,  and  also  to  the 
'*  Gentile,'  for  there  is  no  respect  of  persons  with  God."c 
"  He  that  believeth,  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved ;  but  he 
*« that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned."«i  "Marvel  not  at 
'<  this;  for  the  hour  is  coming,  in  the  which  all  that  are  in 
« their  graves  shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth; 
«  they  that  have  done  good,  unto  the  resurrection  of  life ; 
«  and  they  that  have  done  evil,  unto  the  resurrection  of  dam- 
«nation.''e  **  He  that  is  unjust,  let  him  be  unjust  still:  and 
<^  he  which  is  filthy,  let  him  be  fifthy  still :  and  he  that  is 
"  righteous  let  him  be  righteous  still :  and  he  that  is  holy, 
"let  him  be  holy  still."^  "And  these  shall  go  away  into 
«  everlasting  punisiiment ;  but  the  righteous  into  life  eter- 
«  nal."g  "  And  besides  all  this,  between  us  and  you  there  is 
«  a  great  gulph  fixed :  so  that  they  which  would  pass  from 
*<  hence  to  you  cannot;  neither  can  they  pass  to  us,  that 
«  would  come  from  thence.''^ 

One  would  suppose  that  Mr  Balfour  himself  could  scarce- 
ly demand  a  greater  multiplicity  of  authorities  than  1  have 
cited.  That  they  are  to  the  point,  will  appear  by  remai-king 
the  contrast  which  they  note,  1.  In  the  characters  of  men. 
They  are  spoken  of  as  faithful  and  unprofitable ;  humble  and 

a  Matt.  12;  41—45.  e  In.  5;  28,  29. 

b  Ps.  55;  15,  16,22,23.  f  Rev.  82:11. 

c  Rom.  2;  6—11.  g  Matt.  25;  46. 

A  M^.  16  ;  16.  h  Luke.  16;  2«. 


214 

proud:  wise  and  foolish;  good  and  bad;  holy  and  unjust j 
lightcous  and  wicked ;  believers  and  unbelievers.  2.  There 
is  a  contrast  in  their  standing  in  the  sight  of  their  Maker 
and  Judge ;  as  they  are  written  or  not  written  in  the  book  of 
life ;  bastards  or  sons ;  adversaries  or  people ;  built  on  the 
sand  or  the  rock;  condemned  or  justified  ;  cursed  or  blessed. 
3.  There  is  a  contrast  in  their  future  destiny  ;  as  they  perish 
or  as  they  are  saved  ;  rewarded  or  destroyed;  gathered  a.s 
heirs  of  salvation,  or  cast  down,  cast  away,  and  driven 
away,  as  heirs  of  perdition ;  stored  in  heaven  or  burned  in 
hell ;  continuing  holy  still  and  unjust  still ;  sentenced  ta 
eternal  life  and  eternal  punishment;  to  torment  and  com- 
fort; between  which  there  is  an  impassable  gulph. 

Now  if  my  opponent  can  prove  that  good  is  evil  and  evil 
good ;  that  bitter  is  sweet  and  sweet  bitter  ;  that  darkness 
is  light  and  liglit  darkness ;  and  if  he  can  prove  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  above  passages,  that  the  righteous  shall  fall  for 
ever,  then  may  he  prove  that  the  finally  impenitent  shall  be 
saved. 

FOURTH  ORTHODOX  ARGUMENT. 

NEGATION. 

It  is  proposed  to  prove  the  absolute  eternity  of  the  sin- 
ner's punishment  by  negative  expressions  of  scripture,  in 
which  the  termination  of  that  punishment  is  plainly  denied. 
Eternity  is  correctly  defined  by  endless  duration.  It  is  by 
such  a  mode  of  expression  that  the  bible  conveys  to  us  the 
doctrine  of  the  eternity  of  God,  the  eternity  of  I'hrist's 
kingdom,  and  the  eternity  of  the  saint's  happiness.  If  these 
things  can  be  shewn,  then  the  use  of  such  language  in  rela- 
tion to  the  sinner's  punishment  will  cei'tainly  prove  its  abso- 
lute eternity.  These  particulars  shall  now  be  made  out  in 
the  order  in  which  they  are  here  mentioned. 

1.  Tl»e  eternity  of  God  is  communicated,  by  denying  that 
his  existence  has  an  end.  "  Of  old  hast  thou  laid  the  ioun- 
"  dation  of  ti»e  earth,  and  tlie  heavens  are  the  woi-k  of  thy 
"  hands.  They  shall  perish,  but  thou  shalt  endure;  yea, all 
'*  of  them  shall  wax  old  like  a  garment;  as  a  vesture  shalt 
**  thou  change  them,  and  they  shall  be  changed :  but  thou 
'*  art  the  same,  and  thy  years  shall  have  no  end."a 

2.  The  eternity  of  Christ's  kijtgdom  is  proved  in  the 
same  way.     "  His  dominion  is  an  everlasting  dominion 

a  P».  cii.  25 — 27. 


215 

**  wliich  shall  not  pass  away,  and  his  kingdom  that  which 
"  shall  not  be  destroyed."  "  Of  the  increase  of  his  go- 
"  ernment  and  ptacc  there  shall  be  no  end,  upon  the 
"  throne  of  David,  and  upon  his  kingdom,  to  order  it,  and  to 
*'  estabJisli  it  with  judgment  and  with  justice,  from  henceforth 
*'  even  for  ever."  InMr.  Ballou's  Treatise  on  Atonement,a 
he  admits  the  force  of  these  passages,  m  hen  he  says  that  in 
**  Isaiah  ix  6,  7,  the  Saviour  is  Prophecied  of,  as  possessing 
**  a  kingdom,  the  increase  of  wliich  shall  have  no  end.  To 
*'  the  same  purpose  see  also  Dan.  vii.  14  " 

3.  The  eternity  of  the  saint's  happiness  is  declared  by  ne- 
gative expressions.  "  And  when  the  chief  Shepherd  shall 
"  appear,  ye  shall  receive  a  crown  of  glory,  that 
*^  fadeth  not  away."  Again,  this  is  called  *'  an  incor- 
*'  ruptible''^  crown,  and  "  a  kingdom  Avhich  cannol  be  mo- 
"  ved.'''>  "He  that  overcometh,  the  same  shall  be  clothed 
"  in  white  raiment;  and  I  will  not  blot  out  his  name  out  of 
"  the  book  of  life,  but  I  will  confess  his  name  before  my  Fa- 
"  ther,  and  before  his  angels.''  "  For  I  will  not  contend  for- 
"  ever,  neither  will  1  be  always  wroth."  "  And  God  shall 
*'  wipe  away  all  tears  from  their  eyes;  and  there  shall  be 
"  no  more  death,  neither,  sorrow,  nor,  crying,  neither  shall 
"  there  beany  more  pain."c  Mr.  Ballou,  in  the  place  above 
referred  to,  admits  the  force  of  this  last  text  in  the  fol- 
lowing words,  viz.  *'  How  can  it  be  said  that  God  shall 
'*  wipe  away  all  tears  from  the  eyes  of  men,  if  millions  are 
"  to  mourn  to  an  endless  eternity  ?  Or,  why  is  it  said,  there 
*•'  shall  be  no  more  sori'ow,  crying  nor  pain,  if  sorrow,  cry- 
"  ing,and  infinite  pain  are  never  to  cease  ?"  Also,  the  force 
of  the  text  preceding  the  last,  is  admitted  and  urged  by 
Mr.  Winchester,  in  his  2d  and  4th  Dialogues. 

Now  if  it  be  admitted  by  all  parties  ,•  and  if  it  be  true, 
whether  admitted  or  not;  that  this  sort  of  language  is  valid 
proof  of  the  eternity  of  God,  of  the  eternity  of  Christ's  king- 
dom, and  of  the  eternity  of  the  Saints'  happiness,  what  but 
prejudice  and  unbelief,  can  prevent  us  from  receiving  it,  in 
proof  of  the  eternity  of  the  sinner's  punishment?  But  the  re- 
levancy of  such  evidence,  if  it  can  be  found,  even  in  support 
of  this  obnoxious  doctrine,  has  already  been  implicitly  ac- 
knowledged by  Mr.  Winchester  himself,  while  trying  to  build 
a  bridge  across  the  impassable  gulph.  His  words  are  the 

a  p.  200. 

b  1  Pet.  V.  4.  1  Cor.  ix.  25.  Hebr  xii.  28, 

R  Tsa.  Ivii.  IS.    Rev.  iii.  5.  xx>.4. 


216 

following,  viz.  '*We  cannot  positively  conclude  against  the 
"  restoration,  from  tliis  passage  of  the  rich  niari,  unless  we 
*'  could  find  some  passages  of  Scripture,  where  God  has  pro- 
'*  mised  never  to  restore,  or  reconcile  such  to  himself^  whom 
"  he  hath  once  cast  off."'*  This  is  as  much  as  to  say  that  if 
"  we  could  find  some  passages  of  scripture,  v^  here  God  has 
•*  promised  [or  threatened]  weter  to  restore,  or  reconcile  such 
"to  himself,  whom  he  hath  once  cast  otti'  then  the  rich  man 
and  all  who  die  in  their  sins,  shall  be  in  torment  to  an  abso- 
lute eternity. 

**  And  the  Lord  said,  my  Spirit  shall  not  always  strive 
"  with  man,  for  that  he  also  is  flesh :  yet  his  days  sliall  be  ait 
*'  hundi-ed  and  twenty  years."'*  The  meaning  of  this  pas- 
sage evidently  is,  that  the  day  of  grace,  or  an  opportunity  of 
salvation,  shall  not  last  always,  but  its  utmost  extent  shall  be 
only  during  a  man's  life;  which  was  usually  seven  or  eight 
hundred  years  before  tlie  flood,  one  hundred  and  twenty  after 
it,  and  is  now  three  score  and  ten. 

"  j^ot  every  one  that  saith  unto  me  Lord,  Lord,  shall  enter 
"  into  tlie  kingdom  of  heaven."  "  For  I  say  unto  you  that 
•*  none  of  those  which  were  bidden,  shall  taste  of  my  supper."*^ 
"  Plead  with  your  mother,  plead  :  for  she  is  not  my  wifc» 
"  neither  am  I  her  husband  :'*  "  and  I  will  not  have  mercy 
**  upon  her  children."  "  I  will  no  more  have  mercy  upon  the 
*'  house  of  Israel :"  *'  for  ye  are  not  my  people,  and  I  will 
"  not  be  your  God."  '*  He  that  made  them,  will  not  have 
"  mercy  on  them,  and  he  that  formed  them  will  shew  them  no 
**favour."<i  **For  he  shall  have  judgment  without  mercy,  that 
"hath  shewn  no  mercy."  "The  same  shall  drink  of  the  wine 
**  of  the  wrath  of  God,  wbich  is  poured  out  without  mixture, 
"  into  the  cup  of  his  indignation  ;  and  he  shall  be  tormented 
*<  with  fire  and  brimstone,  in  the  presence  of  the  holy  angels, 
"  and  in  the  presence  of  the  Lamb.  And  the  smoke  of  their 
"  torment  ascendeth  up  forever  and  ever :  and  they  have  no 
"  rest  day  nor  night,  who  worship  the  beast  and  liis  image, 
'*  and  whosoever  receiveth  the  mark  of  his  name.''  "  But 
"  if  ye  forgive  not  men  their  trespasses,  neither  will  your 
"  Father  forgive  your  trespasses."  **  Follow  peace  with  all 
"  men,  and  holiness,  without  which,  no  man  shall  see  the 
**  Lord."  "The  Lord  is  slow  to  anger,  and  gi-eat  in  power, 
"  and  will  not  at  all  acquit  the  wicked."  "  He  shall  lean  up- 


%  Dialogue  2nrf.  c  Matt.  vii.  21.    Luke  xiv.  24. 

h  Gen.  Ti.  5.  <1  Hosea  ii.  2.  4. 1;  vi.  9.  Isa.  27;  I 


.     217 

"  on  liis  house,  but  it  shall  not  stand  :  he  shall  hold  it  fast, 
•'  but  it  shall  not  endure.'a  "  Behold  !  I  I'aiil  say  unto  you, 
"that  if  ye  be  circumcised,  Christ  shall  profit  you  notiung" 
"  Whatsoever  thy  hand  findeth  to  do,  do  it  witli  thy  might; 
"for  there  is  no  work,  nor  device,  nor  knowledge,  nor  wisdom, 
"  in  the  grave  whither  thou  gocst. '  *'  1  must  v.  ork  the  works 
*'  of  him  that  sent  me,  wliile  it  is  day  :  the  night  cometh, 
«*  when  no  man  can  work."  '•  He  that,  being  often  reproved, 
"  hardeneth  his  neck,  shall  he  suddenly  destroyed,  and  tliat 
*'  without  remedy.'',  "  Therefore  the  ungodly  shall  not  stand 
'*  in  the  judgment,  nor  sinners  in  the  congregation  of  the 
'*  righteous."  "There  is  no  peace  saith  the  Lord,  unto  the 
"  wicked."  "He  that  believeth  not  the  Son,  shall  not  see 
"life.*'  *'No  murderer  hath  eternal  life."i>  "But  the  eyes 
"  of  the  wicked  shall/ai/,  and  they  shall  not  escape,  and  their 
"  hope  shall  be  as  the  giving  up  of  the  ghost."  *'For  thus 
"  saith  the  Lord,  thy  bruise  is  incurable^  and  thy  wound  is 
**  grievous."  "  Why  criest  thou  for  thine  affliction  ?  Thy 
«  sorrow  is  incurable  for  the  multitude  of  thine  iniquity  :  be- 
«  cause  thy  sins  were  increased  I  have  done  these  things  un- 
«  to  thee.''  "  For  her  wound  is  incurable.''  '*  Because  there 
«  is  wrath,  hew  are  lest  he  take  thee  aw  ay  with  his  stroke, 
"  then  a  great  ransom  cannot  deliver  thee."  "  Notie  of  them 
"  can  by  any  means  redeem  his  brother,  nor  give  to  God  a 
"  ransom  for  him  ;  (for  the  redemption  of  their  soul  is  pre- 
"  cious,  and  it  ceaseth  forever;)  that  he  should  still  live  for- 
"  ever,  and  not  see  corruption."*^  "  Seek  ye  the  Lord,  and  ye 
"  shall  live  ,•  lest  he  break  out  like  fire  in  the  house  of  Jo- 
"  seph,  and  devour  it,  and  there  be  none  to  quench  it  in 
"  Bethel."  "  But  if  ye  will  not  hearken  unto  me,  to  hallow 
"  the  Sabbath  Day,  and  not  bear  a  burden,  even  entering  in 
"  at  the  gates  of  Jerusalem  on  the  Sabbath  Day  :  then  will 
"  I  kindle  a  fiie  in  the  gates  thereof,  and  it  shall  devour  the 
"  palaces  of  Jerusalem,  audit  shall  not  be  quenched."  '*Cir- 
"  cumcise  yourselves  to  the  Lord,  and  take  away  the  fore- 
"  skins  of  your  heart,  ye  men  of  Judah,  and  inhabitants  of 
••'  Jerusalem  :  lest  my  fury  come  forth  like  fire,  and  burn 
"  that  none  can  quench  it,  because  of  the  evil  of  your  doings." 
*'  O  house  of  David  !  thus  saith  the  Lord ;  execute  judgment 
"  in  the  morning,  and  deliver  him  that  is  spoiled  out  of  the 

aJas.  2;13.  Rev.  14;  10, 11.  Matt.  6:  15,  Hebr.  12:  14,  Nab.  1:  3.  Jab 
8;  15. 

bGal.  5.  •.  Eccles.  9;10.  In,9:4.  Prov.  29;  1.  Ps.  1;  5.  Isa.  48;22.  In. 
3:  36.    1  In.  3;  15. 

c  Job  II:  29.  Jer.  30:  12.  15.  Mic.  1;9.    Job  36;  18.    Ps.  49;  6— 9. 

Dd 


21S 

*'  hand  of  the  oppressor,  lest  my  fury  go  out  like  tire,  and 
"  burn  that  nona  can  quench  it,  because  of  the  evil  of  your 
"  doings."  "  Because  they  have  forsaken  me,  and  have  burnt 
"  incense  unto  other  gods,  that  they  might  provoke  nie  to  an- 
"  ger  with  all  the  works  of  their  hands  ;  therefore  ray  wrath 
"■shall  be  kindled  against  this  place,  and  shall  mo<  be  quench- 
*'  ed."  ''  Son  of  man,  set  thy  face  toward  the  south,  and  drop 
"thy  word  toward  the  south,  and  prophecy  a"  ainst  the  forest 
"  of  the  south  field.  And  say  to  the  forest  of  the  south,  hear 
*' the  word  of  the  Lord:  thus  saith  the  Lord  God;  behold  I 
"  I  will  kindle  afire  in  thee,  and  it  shall  devour  every  green 
*'  ti'ee  in  thee,  and  every  dry  tree  :  the  flaming  flame  shall 
*'  not  be  quenched,  and  all  faces  from  the  south  to  the  north 
"  shall  be  burned  ther'^^n.  And  all  flesh  shall  see  that  I  the 
*'  Lord  have  kindled  it :  it  shall  not  be  quenched.  Then  said 
*'  I,  ah.  Lord  God  !  they  say  of  me,  doth  he  not  speak  para- 
"  bles?"a  "  If  thy  hand  offend  thee,  cut  it  off:  it  is  better  for 
"  thee  to  enter  into  life  maimed,  than  having  two  hands  to  go 
"  into  hel  I,  into  the  fire  that  never  shall  be  quenched ;  where 
"  their  woini  dieth  not,  and  the  fii'e  is  not  quenched.  And  if 
"  thy  foot  oflfend  thee,  cut  it  off;  it  is  better  for  thee  to 
"  enter  halt  into  life,  than  having  two  feet  to  bi;  cast  into  hell, 
"  into  the  fire  that  never  shall  be  quenched ;  wliire  their  worm 
"  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched.  And  if  thine  eye 
"offend  thee,  pluck  it  out:  it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter 
"  into  the  kingdom  of  God  with  one  eye,  than  having  two 
"  eyes,  to  be  cast  into  hell-fire,  where  their  worm  dieth  not 
"  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched."  *'  He  will  burn  up  the  chaff 
"with  unquenchable  Jire.^^  ''  There  are  tlie  workers  of  ini- 
"  quity  fallen  :  they  are  cast  down  and  shall  7iot  be  able  to 
**  rise."  And  in  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes  being  in  torments, 
*'  and  seeth  Abraham  afar  off,  and  Lazarus  in  his  bosom. 
"  And  he  cried  and  said.  Father  Abraham,  have  mercy 
"  on  me ;  and  send  Lazarus,  that  he  may  dip  the 
<'  tij)  of  his  finger  in  water,  and  cool  my  tongue;  for  I  am 
« tormented  in  this  flame.  But  Abraham  said,  son,  remem- 
"  ber  that  thou  in  thy  life  time,  receivedst  thy  good  things, 
t^  and  likewise  Lazarus  evil  things  :  but  now  lie  is  comforted 
,*  and  thou  art  tormented.  And  besides  all  this,  between  us 
*  and  you  there  is  a  great  gulph  fixed ;  so  that  they  which 
*•  would  pass  fi'om  hence  to  you  cannot ;  neither  can  they 
'*  pass  to  us,  that  would  come  from  thence. "b 

a  Amos  5;  6.    Jcr.  17;2r.     4;  4.     21 ;  12.    2Kgs.  22;ir.    Ez;  20.  43— *8. 
^  Mk  9,  43 — i8.    Matt.  3,  12.     Ps.  36, 12,    Luke  16,;23— 26, 


219 

«'  There  is  a  sin  unto  death  :  I  do  not  say  that  he  shall 
^'  pray  for  it."  "  For  it  is  impossible  for  those  who  were 
*'  once  enlightened,  and  have  tasted  of  the  heavenly  ^ifl,  and 
**  were  made  partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  have  tasted 
'*  of  the  good  word  of  God,  and  the  powers  of  the  world  to 
'*  come,  if  they  shall  lall  away,  to  renew  them  again  unto  re- 
"  pentance ;  seeing  they  crucify  to  themselves  the  Son  of 
"  God  afresh,  and  put  him  to  an  open  shame."  "  For  if  we^ 
'*  sin  wilfully  after  that  we  have  received  the  knowledge  of 
**  the  truth,  there  remaineth  no  more  sacrifice  for  sins,  but  a 
**  certain  fearful  looking  for  of  judgment  and  fiery  iudigna^ 
*nion -which  shall  devour  the  adversaries."  "And  whoso- 
**  ever  shall  speak  a  word  against  the  Son  of  man,  it  shall  be 
"  forgiven  him  :  but  unto  him  that  blasphemeth  against  the 
**  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not  be  forgiven."  '*But  he  that  shall  blas- 
"  pheme  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  hath  never  forgiveness,  but 
*'  is  in  danger  of  eternal  damnation."  ''  It  shall  not  be  for- 
*'  given  him,  neither  in  this  world,  neither  in  the  world  to 
*'  come."* 

It  will  not  do  to  deny  or  despise  the  above  passages,  after 
giving  them  the  name  of  parables  :  for  this  foil  was  tried  ia 
vain  by  the  adversary,  in  the  time  of  tzekiel.^  It  will  not 
do  to  get  clear  of  the  worm  that  dietb  not,  by  turning  it  into 
a  butterfly,  as  it  is  said  Mr.  Mitchel  of  New- York  does. 
Such  objections  prove  nothing  more  than  the  deep  depravity 
or  profane  levity  of  those  who  raise  them.  Neither  will  it 
avail,  to  show  that  God  has  threatened  to  pour  out  his  un- 
quenchable fury  "  upon  man  and  upon  beast  :''**  for  if  by  per- 
version, we  apply  to  the  irrational  creation,  that  which  is  in- 
applicable to  them,  then,  to  be  consistent,  we  must  admit 
that  beasts  can  sin,  repent,  and  pray  ;  and  that  they  can  ob- 
tain pardon  and  salvation  ;  and  of  course  be  liable  to  an  ab- 
solutely eternal  punishment.  This  will  appear  from  Jonah 
iii.  8 — 10.  "  But  let  man  and  beast  be  covered  with  sack- 
"  cloth,  and  cry  mightily  unto  God  :  yea  let  them  turn  every 
"  one  from  his  evil  way,  and  from  the  violence  that  is  in  their 
*'  hands.''  But  such  interpretations  I  consider  much  of  a 
piece  with  that  which  scoffing  infidels  give  to  Isa.  xxxvii, 
36.  "  And  when  they  arose  early  in  the  morning,  behold 
**  they  were  all  dead  corpses." 

a  1  Jn.  V.  16.    Hebr.  vi.  4.-6.    x.  26,  27.    Luke  xii.  10.    Mk.  ui.  29.    Matt, 
xii.  32. 
b  XX.  48. 
e  Jer.  Tiii  2©. 


Many  oVthe  above  threats  were  directed  against  the  Jewisii 
nation.  It  was  on  that  unbelieving  and  disobedient  people, 
that  God  said  he  would  have  no  mercy;  they  were  the  sin- 
ners who  were  to  suffer  in  unquenchable  fire.  This  fact  Mr. 
Winchester  thinks  very  important  to  his  cause;  because 
there  are  abundant  prophecies, (some  of  which  are  uttered  in 
close  connexion  with  the  above  threatenings,a)  that  this  peo- 
ple shall  hereafter  be  revived.  On  this  account  be  thinks 
himself  no  loser  by  admitting  that  these  menaces  were  exe- 
cuted. His  words  are  the  following,  viz.  "Now  these  threat- 
"  enings  were  surely  executed  ;  for  the  people  did  not  hear- 
"  ken  to  G«d  :  he  did  certainly  kindle  a  fire,  and  it  burnt 
*'  and  was  not  quenched,  but  consumed  Jerusalem  and  all  her 
"■  palaces  ;  and  the  beautiful  forests  that  were  so  much  es- 
''  teemed  shared  the  same  fate:  but  what  person  will  argue 
"  that  the  whole  city  and  country  must  be  now  in  flames ; 
*'  and  must  have  been  consuming,  from  the  days  of  Jere- 
**  miah  and  Ezekiel,  because  of  these  expressions,  'the 
"  flaming  flame  shall  not  be  quenched,'  &c.  since  we  know 
"  that  Jerusalem,  and  the  country  round  about,  have  been 
''  since  inhabited,  and  will  be  again,  in  a  more  glorious  man- 
**  ner  than  ever  ^''^^ 

This  argument  of  Mr.  Winchester  seems  to  take  it  for 
granted  that  the  above  threatenings  were  chiefly,  if  not  sole- 
ly directed  against  irrational  and  inanimate  objects ;  and 
that  when  these  were  destroyed,  the  prophecy  was  fully  ac- 
complished, and  there  was  no  further  call  for  divine  judg- 
ments. But  did  he  really  believe  that  these  menaces  were 
aimed  at  none  but  forests,  fields,  and  palaces  ?  Are  not  those 
men  who  traverse  these  forests,  cultivate  these  fields,  and 
inhabit  these  palaces,  often  expressly  mentioned,  and  always 
intended,  as  tlie  real  objects  of  these  threatenings?  Did  Je- 
hovah ever  marry  or  divorce  these  inanimate  creatures  ?  Did 
he  ever  condeinn  them  as  sinners?  or  was  thefire  which  con- 
sumed them  unquenchable  ?  Mr.  Winchester  himself  did  not 
believe  that  the  destruction  of  buildings,  trees,  and  fruits, 
was  a  complete  fulfilment  of  God's  threatenings  against  ini- 
quity. Speaking  of  futurity  beyond  the  grave,  he  says  that 
*'  all  the  threatenings  will  be  fulfilled  upon  the  finally  impeni- 
*'  tent."  "As  they  have  lived  and  died  in  sin,  their  destruo- 
"  tion  or  misery  is  certain."*:  This  doctrine  he  draws  from 
passages  in  which  the  language  is  fully  as  figurative  as  that 

*  Hos.  i.  'J.  1 0.  b  Dialogue  2d. 

c  Andrews,  p.  74. 


221 

which  speaks  of  cities  and  their  surrounding  country.  The 
following  are  his  own  words,  viz,  "  He  saith  that  it  is  more 
'*  tolerable  for  the  land,  that  is,  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom,  in 
**  the  day  of  judgment,  than  for  the  cities  where  his  gospel 
*'  was  preached,  and  his  miracles  wrought,  and  yet  the  in- 
•Miabitants  remained  impenitent:  See  St.  Matt.  xi.  24.  x. 
♦«  15,  St.  Mk.  vi.  11.  St.  Luke,  x.  12.  From  all  which  pas- 
**  sages  it  is  evident  that  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom  will  be 
**  condemned  in  the  day  of  judgment,  and  punished  in  the 
"  lake  of  tire."a  To  be  consistent,  therefore,  he  should  have 
told  us  that  it  was  not  only  the  conflagration  of  Jerusalem, 
but  this  lake  of  fire  beyond  the  grave,  to  which  the  objects 
of  the  above  threatenings  were  consigned. 

Now  did  Mr.  Winchester,  or  do  any  of  his  followers,  be- 
lieve that  those  murderous  unbelieving  Jews,  who  were  cut 
off  in  their  sins  near  two  thousand  years  ago,  and  who,  ac- 
cording to  his  own  confession,  will  be  sent  to  the  lake  of  fire, 
in  the  day  of  judgment ; — do  they  believe,  that  long  after 
that  period,  these  same  unbelieving  Jews  are  to  be  taken 
from  this  lake  of  fire  to  heaven,  as  a  fulfilment  of  those  scrip- 
tures which  predict  the  restoration  of  their  distant  posterity 
to  the  favour  of  God,  and  the  possession  of  Jerusalem  ?  If 
they  do  not  believe  an  absurdity,  so  transeendantly  absurd, 
they  ought  not  to  expect  ms  to  do  it.  These  promises  relate 
to  the  restoration  of  those  Jews  who  shall  hereafter  live  and 
die  in  the  faith  of  Christ  :  those  threatenings  condemn  to 
unquenchable  fire,  their  remote  ancestors  who  lived  and  died 
in  unbelief  and  rebellion.  Could  the  destruction  of  their 
city  extinguish  the  unquenchable  fury  of  their  Almighty 
Judge?  or  could  the  faith  of  their  posterity  avert  his  just  in- 
dignation? They  must  perish  through  their  own  sins,  and 
their  posterity  shall  be  graciously  justified  through  that  faith 
which  is  the  gift  of  God.  Thus  it  is  easy  to  reconcile  God's 
threats  of  eternal  punishment  against  the  city  of  Jerusalem 
and  the  land  of  Judea,  with  his  promises  of  eternal  happi- 
ness to  the  same  city  and  land.  The  promise  was  connect- 
ed with  the  faith  of  Christ,  and  the  threat  was  against  unbe- 
lievers. 

My  opponent  well  knows  that  much  stress  is  laid  upon  those 
passages  which  condemn  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost. 
He  finds  one  among  them,  which  says  that  the  perpetrator 
of  this  crime  is  "  in  danger  of  eternal  damnation."  This  he 
thinks  is  far  from  deciding  that  he  will  certainly  incnr  this 

a  IJialogue  stir. 


222 

punishment.  All  is  not  lost  that  is  in  danger.  But  is  h« 
sure  that  this  remark  will  apply  here?  He  sometimes  affects 
a  oreat  familiarity  with  the  original  languages.  A  little  ex- 
amination will  show  hiin  that  the  person  here  spoken  of  is 
represented  as  not  only  in  danger  of  eternal  damnation,  not 
only  obnoxious,  liable^  subject  to  eternal  punishment,  but  de- 
serving of  it,  and  bound  over  to  it.  That  this  is  the  force  of 
the  word  in  this  place  is  evident  from  the  words  immediately 
preceding  ;  where  it  is  declared  that  he  "hath  never  forgive- 
ness;'' and  from  the  parallel  passages  which  forbid  us  to  pray 
for  such  sinners  ;  which  declare  it  impossible  to  renew  them 
again  into  repentance;  that  there  remaineth  no  more  sacri- 
iice  for  sins,  but  a  certain  fearful  looking  for  of  judgment 
and  fiery  indignation  ;  that  "  it  shall  not  be  forgiven ;"  and 
again,  that  "  it  shall  not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this 
'*  world,  neither  in  the  world  to  come." 

Strong  as  this  language  is,  it  is  hardly  stronger  than  that 
of  the  other  passages  adduced.  Although  they  are  not  des- 
cribed as  having  committed  the  unpardonable  sin,  yet  as  they 
b^d forsaken  Got/,  and  burned  incense  unto  other  gods;  as 
they  did  not  hallow  the  Sabbath  ;  as  they  were  ivorkers  of 
iniquity;  and  as  their  sins  ivere  increased^  and  persevered  in, 
therefore  their  bruise,  their  sorrow,  their  wound  should  be 
incurable  ;  their  hope  should  be  as  the  giving  up  of  the  ghost. 
God  would  not  always  strive  with  them ;  he  would  not  for- 
give, he  would  not  acquit  them  ;  he  would  show  them  no 
mercy,  no  favour ;  they  should  not  seethe  Lord  ;  they  should 
have  no  peace,  wo  rest;  and  yet  should  be  able,  to  perform  wo 
work,  no  device,  no  knowledge  no  wisdom,  connected  with 
salvation  :  they  could  not  endure,  and  yet  could  not  escape. 
Jehovah  declared  that  he  was  not  their  God,  not  their  hus- 
band ;  tliat  they  were  not  his  wife,  not  his  people ;  that  they 
should  not  be  delivered,  not  redeemed,  not  ransomed  ;  that 
they  should  not  stand  in  judgment,  not  in  the  congregation  of 
the  righteous,  but  with  worms  that  should  not  die,  and  in  fire 
that  should  not  be  quenched  ;  on  the  infernal  side  of  a  gulph 
which  could  not  be  pass(>d  ;  where  they  could  not  see  life; 
could  not  have  eternal  life ;  where  they  could  not  taste  of 
the  Master's  supper;  but  should  drink  of  the  cup  of  God's 
wrath  without  mixture,  have  judgment  without  mercy,  and 
destruction  without  remedy. 

No  wonder  that  those  who,  in  defiance  of  all  these  scrip 
tural  negations,  deny  the  absolute  eternity  of  the  sinner's  pun- 
isbraeot,  deny  also  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  bible. 


223 

:fifth  orthodox  argument. 

AFFIUMATION. 

It  is  proposed  to  prove  the  absolute  eternity  of  the  sinnej.s 
punishment,  by  passages  of  scripture  in  which  this  doctrine 
is  affirjned.  This  aflirnjation  may  be  in  two  forms  of  ex- 
pression ,•  the  one  declaring  the  state  ofthe  damned,  theotlier 
declaring  the  duration  of  their  punishment.  To  say  that  an 
Hebrew  bondman  had  his  ear  boi'ed,  is  the  same  as  saying 
that  he  was  to  be  a  servant  for  life  ;— to  afllirm  that  a  young 
religieuse  has  taken  the  veil,  is  precisely  equivalent  to  an  af- 
firmation that  she  is  to  be  immui-ed  for  life,* — so,  those  scrip- 
tures which  assert  that  the  wicked  are  cast  into  helK  and 
those  which  assert  that  they  are  bound  over  to  eternal  dam- 
nation, are  equivalent  to  each  other.  Although  one  class  of 
texts  points  out  more  expressly  the  state  of  the  damned,  and 
the  other  class  more  expressly  the  duration  of  their  punish- 
ment, it  shall,  with  the  help  of  God,  be  shewn  that  they  both 
affirm  the  solemn  truth  that  the  sufferings  of  these  unbeliev- 
ers are  absolutely  eternal.  These  things  may  now  be  con- 
sidered in  their  order. 

I. 
THE  STATE  OF  THE  DAMNED. 

That  there  is  a  hell,  and  that  the  finally  impenitent  liavQ 
their  portion  there,  is  a  matter  of  plain  revelation.  "  Who- 
"  soever  shall  say,  thou  fool,  shall  be  in  danger  of  ^c/Z-fire." 
*•  But  he  knoweth  not  that  the  dead  are  there  ;  and  that  her 
"guests  are  in  the  depths  of  hellJ*'  "Her  house  is  tlie  way 
•'  to  hell^  going  down  to  the  chambers  of  death."  "  Her  feet 
*■*  go  down  to  death,  her  steps  take  hold  on  /te//."  "  But  I  will 
**=  forewarn  you  whom  ye  shall  fear:  fear  him,  which,  after 
'*  he  hath  killed,  hath  power  to  cast  into  helL  Yea  I  say  unto 
*'  you,  fear  him."  "  And  fear  not  them  which  kill  the  body, 
**  but  are  not  able  to  kill  the  soul :  but  rather  fear  him,  which 
"  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  Ae//.'*  '♦  God  spared 
*'  not  the  angels  that  sinned,  but  cast  them  down  to  hell,  and 
"  delivered  them  into  chains  of  darkness,  to  be  reserved  unto 
"  judgment.''  "  The  wicked  sliall  be  turned  into  hell,  and  all 
'*  the  nations  that  for-get  God."  "  Let  death  seize  upon  them. 
"  and  let  them  go  down  quick  into  hell.*'  "  Therefore  hell 
"  hath  enlarged  herself,  and  opened  her  mouth  without  mea- 
"  sure  :  and  their  glory,  and  their  multitude,  and  their  pomp, 
^'  and  he  that  rejoiceth,  shall  descend  into  it."  "*  It  is  better 
*'  far  thee  to  enter  into  life  maimed,  than  having  two  hands. 


2S4 

"  to  go  into  hell,  into  the  fire  that  never  shall  be  quenched." 
"  And  in  Ae//,  he  lilted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments  ;"  be- 
tween which  and  the  happiness  of  heaven,  there  was  an  iin- 
p?.ssable  gulph.  Well  might  our  Saviour  then  ask,  "  how 
can  ye  escape  the  damnation  of  hell  ?"a 

An  Universalist  polemic  has  a  ready  answer  to  all  these 
authorities.  He  tells  you  that  our  translators  have  hei'c 
used  the  word  hell  to  render  four  distinct  words  in  the  origi- 
nal, neither  of  which  denotes  a  state  of  eternal  punishment. 
These  four  words  Sheol,  Hades,  Gehenna,  and  Tartarus^  arc 
so  innocent  in  their  view,  that  they  form  the  scenes  of  their 
niiist  protracted  and  delightful  literary  excursions.  On  them 
alone,  Mr.  Balfour  has  w  ritten  a  volume  of  four  hundred  and 
forty-one  pages  octavo.  The  size  of  the  book  does  not  as- 
tonish those  who  have  w  aded  through  its  pendantie  lore  and 
tiresome  tautology.  By  these  means,  and  by  the  greater  use 
of  irrelevant  extracts  from  other  autliors,  (a  practice  with 
which  he  is  acquainted)  he  might  enlarge  it  indefinitely;  and 
the  admiration  of  certain  readers  mig;ht  keep  pace  with  its 
growth. 

It  is  confessed  that  his  voluminous  extracts  from  Dr.  Geo: 
Campbell  of  Aberdeen,  are  relevant,  thougli  not  always  cor- 
rect. The  career  of  this  great  man  is  not  an  enviable  one. 
The  pride  of  originality,  and  the  lust  of  praise  led  him  fre- 
quently astray.  For  fear  of  being  esteemed  a  servile  fol- 
lower of  the  orthodoxy  of  his  fathers,  he  became  the  dupe  of 
the  erroneous.  Under  the  promise  of  liberty,  they  reduced 
him  to  slavery :  and  their  subsequent  treatment  has  been 
like  that  of  Pharaoh  to  the  Israelites,  or  the  devil  to  Eve. 
Because  he  would  not  renounce  every  particle  of  the  truth, 
and  shew  them  the  hundredth  favour,  they  would  not  thank 
him  for  the  ninety-nine.  The  following  is  Mr.  Balfour's 
character  of  this  accommodating  scholar,  viz.  "  It  should  be 
*'  kept  ill  remembrance,  that  Dr.  Campbell  was  a  very  cele- 
*'  brated  minister  of  the  church  of  Scotland,  and  Principal  of 
**  Marischal  College,  Aberdeen.  The  most  learned,  yea,  the 
'*  very  best  of  men,  are  liable  to  be  influenced  by  the  places 
"  of  honour  and  emolument  tliey  occupy.  There  is  no  doubt 
"in  my  mind, that  had  Dr.  Campbell  written  in  a  situation 
*'  free  of  all  restraint,  he  would  have  given  us  a  very  differ- 
"  ent  account  of  Gehenna  and  its  punishment.    The  doctrine 

a  MaU.  V.  22.  Prov.  ix.  18.  vii.  27.  v.  5,  Luke  xii.  6.  Matt.  x.  28.  2  Pet, 
ii.4.    P».  ix.  17.    It.  15.    Mk.ix.43.    Lukexvi.23.    Matt,  xxiii.  33. 


225 

''  of  eternal  misery,  was  a  principal  article  in  the  creed  he 
"  was  obliged  to  subscribe  to,  and  by  which  he  lield  his 
"  phice  and  all  its  emoluments :  It  is  rather  a  matter  of  sur- 
"  prise  that  he  ventured  to  write  so  much  at  variance  with  this 
"  doctrine,  considering  the  time  he  lived,  and  circumstan- 
"  ces  in  which  he  was  placed."* 

This  is  the  reward  wliich  Dr.  Campbell  has  generally  re- 
ceived for  those  servile  compliances,  wliich  he  vainly  ima- 
gined, constituted  the  essence  of  independence.  He  is  here 
represented  as  an  Universalist  in  heart,  while  a  Presbyteri- 
an by  a  solemn  profession.  His  place  of  honour  and  emo- 
lument is  here  given  as  his  reason  for  being  a  Presbyterian ; 
and  it  was  only  the  love  of  filthy  lucre  that  kept  him  from 
professing  an  opposite  system  of  religion.  But  what  must 
we  think  of  the  morality  of  Universalism,  when  we  are  told 
by  its  champion,  that  "the  very  best  of  men  are  liable  to  be 
influenced  by"  such  motives  ?  And  let  it  be  remembered  that 
this  is  no  hasty  or  novel  concession ;  for  these  Universalist 
Unitarians  claim  Locke,  Newton,  and  a  host  of  worthies, 
while  allowing  that  they  were  guilty  of  the  same  inconsis- 
tency. But  must  not  that  be  the  synagogue  of  Satan,  in  whose 
eyes  the  avaricious  and  deceitful,  liars  and  perjured  persons, 
are  "  the  very  best  of  men ,'" 

Dr.  Campbell's  example  and  reward  should  be  an  instruc- 
tive lesson  to  those  who  are  beset  with  his  temptations.  They 
would  persuade  you  to  deny  or  conceal  the  doctrines  of  origi- 
nal sin  and  natural  inability,  and  the  doctrines  of  pai'ticular 
election  and  redemption.  They  will  then  represent  you  as 
in  the  high  road  to  fame.  The  mead  of  flattery  is  pleasant : 
they  perceive  that  it  is  relished  by  you  :  they  see  you  advan- 
cing in  error:  their  mouths  are  open  for  a  burst  of  applanse, 
upon  your  next  step  towards  destruction.  You  make  anoth- 
er effort  to  please ;  and  completely  succeed,  by  asserting  that 
God  has  uttered  threats,  which  never  were  executed,  and  ne- 
ver will  be  executed,  either  on  the  actual  offender,  or  on  his 
surety,  If  they  were  pleased  with  your  advocating  an  uni- 
versal atonement,  which  according  to  the  scriptures,  would 
secure  an  universal  salvation ;  they  are  more  pleased  with 
your  adding  to  this,  a  virtual  denial  of  God's  faithfulness 
and  justice,  which  would  for  ever  secure  them  from  the  fear  of 
damnation.  Although  this  doctrine  was  preached  in  Eden^ 
before  the  fall  of  man,  by  a  superhuman  intelligence,  your 
seducers  will  give  you  the  praise  of  originality,  and  extra- 

a  Chap.  ii.  Sec.  1. 

E  E 


226 

ordinary  intellectiuil  vigour.  You  are  now  a  manof  an  inde- 
pendent spirit :  you  have  escaped  from  the  shackles  of  pa- 
rental example ;  of  human  authority,  of  sectarianism,  supersti- 
tion and  higotry.     By  this  time  you  have  a  justei-  sense  of 
your  own  impoi'tance.     You  clearly  ])erceive  the  \  ast  supe- 
riority of  your  attainments,  over  those  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly,  the  Synod  of  Dort,  the  Reformers,  and  Augus- 
tine ;  although  in  reality,  not  fit  to  be  placed  with  the  dogs 
of  their  flocks.    If  the  Rubicon  is  not  already  past,  only  one 
step  remains  to  do  it :   Deny  all  imputation  ;  not  o))ly  the 
imputation  of  Chiist's  righteousness  to  his  people;  not  only 
the  transfer  of  Adam's  guilt  to  his  posterity  ;  but  the  impu- 
tation of  our  sins  to  Christ.     Quote  to  them  the  beginning 
of  Ezekiel  xviii,  and  shew  that  the  law  does  not  admit  of  a 
substitute.     Then  give  up  all  hopes  from  the  orthodox,  and 
"  make  an  agreement  with  me  hy  a  present,  and  come  out 
"  to  me :  and  eat  ye  every  one  of  his  vine ;  and  every  one  of  his 
*'  fig-tree,  and  drink  ye  every   one  the  waters  ofhis  own 
"  cistern  ;    until  I  come  and  take  you  away  to  a  land  like 
**  your  own  land,  a  land  of  corn  and  wine,  a  land  of  bread 
*•  and  vineyards. "a    But  if  you  refuse  to  take  the  two  last 
steps  above  mentioned,  and  alTthe  others  which  are  conse- 
quent upon  them  ; — if  you  prefer  remaining  in  that  church 
to  whose  creed  you  have  sworn, — remember,  that  although 
we  may  praise  you,  while  living,  for  that  portion  of  error 
which  you  have  received,  we  shall,  after  your  death,  place 
you  with  "  the  very  best  of  men,"  such  as  Dr.  Campbell, 
and  Judas  and  Esau;  all  of  whom  sold  their  birthrights  for 
a  mess  of  pottage.     When  such  a  man  dies,  his  own  flatter- 
ers precede  the  Orthodox  in  blasting  his  fame.     "The  me- 
"  mory  of  the  just  is  blessed :  but  the  name  of  the  wicked 
*•  shall  rot."'' 

But  it  is  time  to  examine  the  amount  of  Dr.  Campbell's 
authority,  and  the  use,  or  rather  the  abuse  which  has  been 
made  of  it  by  the  Universalists.  My  opponent  asserts  that 
Dr.  Cambell  has  "  given  up  all  but  the  term  Gehenna,  as  a 
"  place  of  future  punishment  for  the  wicked."  He  gives  it 
as  Dr.  Campbell's  avowed  belief  that  hades  and  sheol  '*  have 
"  no  reference  whatever  to  a  state  of  punishment  after 
"  death."c  Mr.  Balfour,  in  speaking  of  Dr.  Campbell's  ob- 
servations upon  the  *'  place  of  torment  for  the  wicked,"  says; 
*'  He  denies  that  it  is  called  by  the  names  iSheol,  Hades,  or 

a  Is.  xxxvi,  16, 17,  c  Minutes,  p.  176. 

b  ProT.  X.  7. 


227 

*'  Tartarus  .-yea,  he  denies  that  the  Hebrew,  Greek,  or  En- 
*•  glish  languages,  afford  a  name  for  this  place  of  torment."* 
This  goes  even  farther  than  my  opponent;  and  denies  that 
Dr.  Campbell  believed  any  of  these  four  names,  even  Gehen- 
na itself,  to  denote  the  place  of  torment.  This  may  seem 
astonishiuj^  to  those  v^^bo  are  informed,  that  only  three  pa- 
ges before  this  extravagant  assertion,  he  had  quoted  and 
censured  tbe  Doctor's  declaration  to  the  contrary,  concern- 
ing Gehenna ;  and  in  a  distant  part  of  the  same  work,''  he 
says  "  that  he  denies  that  Hades  is  the  place  of  eternal  pun- 
ishment j  and  tbat  be  contends  for  Gehenna  being  this 
place."  Could  it  be  expected  tbat  only  four  pages  before 
this,  he  had  quoted  Dr.  Campbell's  own  words,  in  which  he 
declared  the  contrary  ?  The  passage  is  as  follows,  viz  : 
"  But  is  there  not  one  passage,  it  may  be  said,  in  which 
the  word  Hades  must  be  understood  as  synonymous  with 
Gehenna,  and  consequently  must  denote  the  place  of  final 
punishment  prepared  for  tbe  wicked,  or  Hetl  in  tbe  Chris- 
tian acceptation  of  tbe  term  ?  Ye  have  it  in  the  story  of  the 
rich  man  and  Lazarus,  Luke  x>i.  23,  '  In  Hell,  sv  tw  a(5*i,  he 
lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments^  and  seeth  Abraham  afar 
off,  and  Lazarus  in  his  bosom.''  This  is  the  only  passage  in 
Holy  Writ  which  seems  to  give  countenance  to  tbe  opinion 
that  hades  sometimes  means  the  same  thing  as  gehenna. 
Here  it  is  represented  as  a  place  of  punishment.  The  rich 
man  is  said  to  be  tormented  there  in  tbe  midst  of  flames.'' 

Thus  does  the  favourite  autlior  of  the  Universalists  bear 
testimony  against  them.  He  declares  tbat  in  this  important 
passage,  the  woid  Hades  denotes  "  the  place  of  final  punish- 
"  ment  prepared  for  the  wicked,  or  Hell^  in  the  Christian  ac- 
"  ceptation  of  the  term :"  and  let  it  be  marked,  that  he  be- 
lieved this  Hell,  this  Hades,  this  Gehenna^  to  be  a  place  of 
absolutely  eternal  punisbment;  which  belief  is  proved  to  be 
correct  by  the  passage  quoted  above.  This  point  being  es- 
tablished, there  is  a  strong  probability,  if  not  a  certainty, 
that  Sheol  also,  signifies  the  place  of  everlasting  punisbment, 
since  tbe  Septuagint  generally  renders  sheol  by  hades ;  and 
it  is  acknowldged  by  both  parties,  that  they  arc  synony- 
mous. In  speaking  of  Sheol^  Campbell  says  tbat  "  in  trans- 
**  latingthat  word,  tbe  Seventy  have  almost  invariably  used 
"■  Hades."  The  same  fact  has  been  stated  by  my  opponent 
in  the  very  same  words.*  Mr.  Balfour  says  that  *■'  iSheol  and 

a  Chap.  ii.  Sec;  1.  o  Minutes,  p.  135. 

b  Chap.  i.  Scb.  3. 


5>28 

"  Hades  are  only  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  names  for  the  same 
"  place."a 

The  fact  that  these  two  words,  occurring  in  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  are  synonymous,  after  the  meaning  of  one 
of  thenns  thus  fail  ly  settled,  proves  that  the  doctiine  of  a  fu- 
ture state  is  common  to  both  dispensations.  This,  thougli  de- 
nied by  my  opponent,  is  admitted  by  Mr.  Baifour.  The  fol- 
lowing are  his  words,  viz  :  "  That  both  future  existence  and 
"  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  were  in  some  degi'ce  known 
*'  under  the  old  dispensation,  we  think  can  be  proved."  For 
proof  of  this,  he  refers  to  several  scriptures.ij  He  also  gives 
an  extract  from  Jahn^s  Biblical  Aarchceloyy^  in  which,  scrip- 
turcc  is  produced  to  prove  "  reception  into  the  presence  of 
God  at  death. "^  The  adoption  of  the  question  under  discus- 
sion, would  indicate  that  my  opponent  believes  in  a  separate 
existence  of  the  soul  from  the  body,  as  Mr.  Balfour  does. 
But  in  your  presence,  and  elsewhere,  he  has  proved  himself 
a  Materialist.  He  not  only  denies  that  the  Old  Testament 
reveals  a  future  state,  but  that  either  the  old  or  New  Testa- 
ment contains  the  doctrine  of  an  intermediate  state.  It  is 
not  my  design,  however,  to  notice  these  questions,  at  present, 
except  as  they  are  merged  in  the  argument  which  is  now  in 
hand ;  in  the  prosecution  of  which  it  becomes  necessary  to  ex- 
amine, as  concisely  as  possible,  the  meaning  of  the  inspired 
words,  Sheol,  Bacies,  Gehenna^  and  lartarus,  in  the  order 
in  which  they  are  here  placed. 

1. 

SHUOL. 

Mr.  Balfour  has  already  told  us  that  this  word  occurs  six- 
ty-four times  in  the  Hebrew  Bible.  Those  who  will  take 
the  trouble  to  examine  them  with  the  aid  of  a  concordance, 
will  probably  find  the  following  account  to  be  correct. 

(J  )  In  two  passages  it  appears  to  signify  the  grave. 
"  Like  sheep  they  are  laid  in  Sheol.'*  Our  bones  are  scatter- 
ed at  the  mouth  of  Slieol.'^ 

(2.)  There  are  three  passages,  in  which  it  appears  to  em- 
brace the  interment  of  the  body,  and  the  final  condition  of 
the  soul.  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram  are  said  to  "  go  down 
alive  into  Sheol.'"'  "  They  and  all  that  appertained  to  them^ 
went  down  alive  into  Sheol.*'     Solomon  makes  the  robber 

a  Chap.  i.  Sec.  2.  d  Balfour,  Cliap.  ii.  Sec.  6.  Chap.  i.  Sec.  1. 

b  Mark  xii  26,  27.  Heb.  xith  Chap,  d  Pa.  49  :  14  j  141  ;  7. 
c  Hag.  2.  US,  Eccl,  12, 7, 


229 

say,*'  Let  us  swallow  them  up  alive  as  SheoU  and  whole  as 
"  those  that  go  down  into  the  pit."* 

(3.)  There  are  five  places,  in  which  it  seems  to  exclude 
the  interment  of  the  hody  This  does  not  appear  from  three 
of  them,  in  which  Jacob's  gray  hairs  are  represented  as 
brought  down  with  sorrow  to  sfieol;  except  by  a  comparison 
with  a  fourth,  in  wliich  he  expected  to  find  in  sheol,  his  son 
Joseph,  whom  he  believed  to  have  been  devoured  by  wild 
beasts,  and  of  course,  not  be  in  the  grave.  The  fifth  is  the 
one  in  which  Jonah  is  said  to  cry  to  God  "out  of  the  belly 
of  sheol.^''^  and  of  course  not  out  of  tlie  grave. 

(4.)  There  are  13  otlier  places  in  which,  without  stop- 
ping to  discuss  the  subject  I  humbly  conceive  it  signifies 
the  intermediate  state  of  all  the  dead,  saints  and  sinners. 
I  shall  simply  refer  to  the  texts,  <=  This  sheol,  or  state  of  se- 
paration, must  come  to  an  end ;  because  at  the  resurrection, 
the  souls  and  bodies  of  men  must  be  reunited. 

(5.)  There  are  two  instances,  in  which  it  evidently  means 
the  separate  state  of  the  happy  dead.  "  O  that  thou  wouldst 
hide  me  in  sheol!  that  thou  wouldst  keep  me  secret,  until 
thy  wrath  be  past,  that  thou  wouldst  appoint  me  a  set  time 
and  remember  me."  "  For  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  ia 
sheol,  neither  wilt  thou  suffer  thine  Holy  One  to  see  crorup- 
tion."  As  the  soul  of  the  Redeemer,  after  the  crucifixion, 
went  to  Paradise,  this  is  the  sheol  here  mentioned ;  and 
there  it  was  that  Job  wished  to  be  hidA 

(6.)  Although  in  the  passages  referred  to,  under  number 
four,  this  word  appears  to  embrace  heaven  and  hell,  until 
the  resurrection ;  there  are  six  places  in  which  it  denotes  the 
latter  in  contrast  with  the  former.  Concerning  God's  om- 
niscience. Job  says,  "It  is  as  high  as  heaven,  what  canst 
thou  do  ?  deeper  than  sheol^  what  canst  thou  know.'"'  The 
Psalmist  says,  "If  I  ascend  up  into  heaven,  thou  art  there, 
if  I  make  my  bed  in  sheol,  behold  thou  art  there."  "  Solo- 
mon says,  *'  the  way  of  life  is  above  to  the  wise,  that  he  may 
depart  from  sheol  beneath."  "Moreover  the  Lord  spake 
unto  Ahaz,  saying,  ask  thee  a  sign  of  the  Lord  thy  God; 
ask  it  either  in  sheol,  or  in  the  height  above."  "  Though 
they  dig  into  sheol,  thence  shall  mine  hand  take  them,-  though 


a  Numb.  xvi.  30,  33.  Pror.  i.  12. 
b  Gen.  42;  38,44;  31,  29.  Jonah  2;  2. 

c  1  Sam.  2;  6.  Job,  7;  9, 17;  13,  16,  26;  6.    Ps.  6;  5,  88;  3.  89:  48.    EctsI.9:10 
li.  38;  18.  Hos.  13: 14.  2  ice.  Hab.  2;  5. 
d  Job,  14;  13.  Ps.  16;1G. 


:>30 

tliey  climb  up  to  heaven,  thence  will  I  bring  them  down."* 
(7.)  There  ai-e  eleven  places  in  addition  to  the  nine  men- 
tioned in  numbers  two  and  six  above,  in  which  it  is  proba- 
bly used  to  denote  the  place  of  future  punishment.  "  Let 
*'  not  his  hoar  head  go  down  to  sheol  in  peace.'*  *'  Norh  his 
"  hoar  head  bring  thou  down  to  sheol  with  blood."  "  O 
"  Lord  !  thou  hast  brought  up  my  soul  from  sheol :  thou  hast 
"  kept  me  alive  tliat  I  should  not  go  down  to  the  pit.*'  Here 
is  a  synonivious  parallel^  in  which  the  latter  clause  of  the 
verse  explains  the  meaning  of  the  former.  **His  soul  was 
virtually  brought  up  from  hell,  by  his  being  delivered  from 
the  pow  cr  of  tbe  devil,  and  preserved  from  going  to  the  pit. 
**  Thy  pomp  is  brought  dow  n  to  slieoU*  "  Sheollrova  beneath 
"  is  moved  for  thee,  to  meet  thee  at  thy  coming."  As  our  Sa- 
viour speaks  of  the  rich  man's  sufferings  in  another  world, 
while  his  body  was  in  the  grave,  so  the  body  of  this  fallen 
hero  is  represented  as  covered  with  worms,  while  yet  his 
soul,  and  the  souls  of  "all  the  chief  ones  of  the  earth,"*'  all 
"the  kings  of  the  nations,"  are  in  the  exercise  of  a  sort  of 
activity  and  intelligence,  and  suffering  under  degradation 
and  punishment  in  another  world.  Again,  the  prophet 
threatens  him,  "  Yet  thou  shalt  be  brought  down  to  sheol,  to 
tlie  sides  of  the  pit."  That  this  is  not  the  grave,  but  a  place 
of  future  punishment,  will  appear  from  Job  xxxiii.  24,  where 
deliverance  from  going  down  to  this  pit^  is  said  to  be  the 
end  of  Christ's  gracious  interposition,  as  a  Ransom  or 
Atonement ;  (as  it  is  in  the  margin.)  Now  the  atonement 
Aoes\ircHerve  from  going  down  to  Hell,  but  not  from  going 
down  to  the  gi'ave.  "We  have  made  a  covenant  with  death 
and  with  sheol  are  we  at  agreement "  "  Your  covenant 
*' with  death  shall  be  disannulled,  and  your  agreement  with 
*'«/ieo/ shall  not  stand."  "I  said,  in  the  cutting  off  of  my 
'•  days,  I  shall  go  to  the  gates  of  sheol.^^  "  For  sheol  can- 
*' not  praise  thee  ;  death  cannot  celebrate  thee:  they  that 
"  go  down  into  the  pit  cannot  hope  for  thy  truth."* 

(8.)  There  are  25  places  in  which  sheol  is  certainly  used 
for  helU  in  the  Christian  sense  of  the  word.  Moses,  in  speak- 
ing of  men,  under  the  figures  of  the  earth  and  the  mountains^ 
(language  familiar  to  the  scriptures,)d  says,   "  For  a  fire  is 

a  Job,  II;  8.  Pg.  139;  8.  Prov.  15,24.    Is,  7. 11.  Am.  9.  2. 

b  This  i«  the  true  force  of  the     ^     in  this  and  some  other  passagt;^. 

c  I  Kg8.  ii.  6,  9      Ps.  XXX.  3.     Is.  xiv.  9.  11    15    '28.  15. 18.  38.  10. 
d  See  Deut.  xxxii.  1.    Ps,  xcvi.  1.  11.     1  Chr.  xvi.  31.  33.    Is.  ii.  2.  41.  IS- 
Ei.  vi.  2. 


231 

**  kindled  in  mine  angcrand  shall  burn  unto  the  lowest  slieol, 
"and  shall  consume  tlie  eai'th  with  her iiici-ease,  an<l  set  on 
•*fire  the foundations  of  the  mountains.""  David  says,  "  thou 
"  hast  delivered  my  soul  from  the  lowest  sheoi  ;'\,  and  the 
same  writer  says  again,  '*  The  sorrows  of  sheoi  compassed 
**  me  about ;  the  snares  of  death  prevented  me  :"c  and  again, 
*•  The  sorrows  of  death  compassed  me,  and  the  pains  of 
"  sheol  gat  hold  upon  me  :  I  found  trouble  and  soi'io\v."«i  Af- 
ter quoting  this  text,  my  o])ponent  speaks  as  follows,  viz. 
•*  We  there  find  the  Psalmist  declaring  that '  the  pains  of  hell' 
"  had  actually  got  hold  of  him.  Now  if  the  pains  of  hell 
"  had  actually  got  hold  of  him,  will  it  do  to  say  that  he  re- 
*'  turned  thanks  to  God  that  he  had  preserved  him  from  going 
*•  into  hell,  or  that  he  had  not  been  there  ?''e  In  reply,  I 
would  observe  that  this  reasoning  of  my  opponent  proves  too 
much,  and  therefore  will  avail  him  nothing.  The  text  in 
question  has  several  clauses.  In  the  first  the  Psalmist  says, 
'*  The  sorrows  of  death  compassed  me.'*  In  the  second  he 
says,  *'  the  pains  of  hell  gat  hold  upon  me."  Now  if  the 
second  clause  prove  that  he  was  in  hell,  does  not  the  first 
prove  that  he  died  before  he  went  thither  ?  In  answer  to 
this  question,  my  opponent  has  expressly  declared,  that  "  the 
"  sorrows  of  death  are  all  ex])erienced  and  felt,  before  death 
**  actually  takes  place."t  This  is  true:  but  it  is  no  less  true, 
that  the  pains  of  hell  gat  hold  upon  him,  before  he  was  actu- 
ally sent  to  hell.  These  three  texts  are  all  tantamount  to 
Ps.  XXX.  3,  noticed  in  No.  7,  above,  in  which  the  latter 
line  of  the  distich  explains  tlie  former  :  *'  O  Lord  !  thou 
•*  hast  brought  up  my  soul  from  sheoi:  thou  hast  kept  me 
"  alive,  that  I  should  not  go  down  to  the  pit."  The  same 
interpretation  is  to  be  applied  to  Solomon's  instruction  for 
the  correction  of  a  child :  "  Thou  shalt  beat  him  with  the 
"  rod,  and  shalt  deliver  his  soul  from  sheoVs  The  Psalmist 
says,  "  Let  death  seize  upon  them,  and  let  them  go  down 
*' quick  into  sheol:  for  wickedness  is  in  their  dwellings  and 
"  and  among  them."h  Concerning  the  impure  of  both  sexes, 
Solomon  says,  "  But  he  knoweth  not  that  the  dead  are  there. 


a  Deut  xxxii.  22.  i^'L 

b  Ps.  Ixxxvi.  13.  \^*t 

c  2  Sam.  xxii.  6.    S:  Ps.  xviii.  5.  "T;  ^ 

d  Ps.  cxvi,  3. 

e  .Minutes  p.  cxli, 

f  Little  yellow  covered  sermon,  published  m  1894,  p.  3i. 

g  Prov.  xxiii.  14. 

h  Ps.  It.  15. 


232 

*^  and  that  her  guests  are  in  the  depths  of  sheoV    "  Her  feet 
**  go  down  to  death;  her  steps  talcc  hold  on  sheoL^^     These 
passages  are   explained  by  another  which,    says,    "  Her 
"house  is  the  way*to  sheol;  go"ig  down  to  the  chambers  of 
''death.""    To  such  characters  Isaiah  says,*'  thou"'  "  didst 
"  debase  thy  self  even  unto  sheoh''^^     Whether  this  hell  was 
before  or  after  death,  may  be  learned  from  Ezekiel  who  says 
of  a  certain  character,  *•  he  went  down  to  sheol.'*     "least 
**  him  down  to  sheol,  with  them  that  descend  into  the  pit." 
*'  They  also  went  down  into  s/ieol  with  him,  unto  them  tbat 
*'  be  slain  with  the  sword."     "  The  strong  among  the  migh- 
"ty  shall  S|)eak  to  him  out  of  the  midst  oi  sheol  with  them 
**  that  help  him  :  they  are  gone  down,  they  lie  uncircumcis- 
**  ed,  slain  by  the  sword. '     *'  And  they  shall  not  lie  with  the 
**  mighty  that  are  fallen  of  the   uncircumcised,   which  are 
*'  gone  down  to  sheol,  with  their  weapons  of  war:  and  they 
*  have  laid  their  swords  under  their  heads,  but  their  iniqui- 
"ties  shall  be  upon  their  bones,  though  they  were  the  terror 
"  of  the  mighty  in  the  land  of  the  living.'*c     That  this  hell 
was  not  before  death,  is  evident,  because  the  subjects  of  it, 
though  formerly  "  in  the  land  of  tlie  living,"  were  "  slain  with 
the  sword,''  before  they  went  to  hell.     That  sheol  here  means 
something  more  than  the  interment  of  the  body,  appears  from 
their  speaking  to   one  another  out  of  the  midst  of  sAeo/,  as 
did  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus.     They  had  vainly  expected 
that  by  laying  their  swords  under  their  heads  in  the  grave, 
they  should  take  their  weapons  of  war  with  them   to  sheol. 
Contempt  is  here  thrown  upon  this  expectation,  by  ironical- 
ly asserting  its   truth.     Instead  of  this,  however,  it  is  de- 
clai'ed  that  "  their  iniquities,  or  the  punishment  of  their  ini- 
**  quities,  shall  be  upon  their  bones."     This  shews  that  they 
were  in  torment  with  the  rich  man,  whose  iniquity  was  upon 
his  tongue.     With  a  view  to  the  reception  of  many  such  cha- 
racters, Isaiah  says,  **  iSheol  hath  enlarged  herself,  and  open- 
**  ed  her  mouth  without  measure  :  and  theii*  glory,  and  theii* 
"multitude,  and  their  pomp,  and  he  that  rejoiceth,  shall  des- 
*'  cend  into  it.''d     The  Restitutionists  say  that  this  mouth 
which  is  opened  witliout  measure,  shall  one  day  be  satisfied. 
'Rnt  *'■  sheol*  is  declared  by  Solomon,  to  be   one   of  those 
things  that  say,  *•  it  is  not  enough."^    They  and  the  Des- 

a  Prov.  ix.  18.  v.  5.  vii.  27. 

b  Is.  Ivii.  9. 

c  Ez.  xxxi.  15—17.32.  21<  2". 

d  Is.  T.  14. 

e  Prov.  ,\xx.  16. 


233 

tructionists  think  that  after  '*  Sheol  hath  enlarged  herself," 
she  will  nevertheless  become  superannuated,  and  die.  This 
is  correct,  when  apj)lied  to  number  four  above.  There  will, 
at  the  resurrection,  be  a  re-union  of  the  souls  and  the  bodies 
of  men,  and  therefore  a  state  of  separation  will  be  forever  at 
an  end.  Thus  sheoU  in  that  sense,  may  be  said  to  be  "  old 
and  full  of  days,'*  or  satisjied  with  living,  as  Moses  says 
Isaac  was,  wlien  he  was  gathered  to  his  people,  and  his  sons 
buried  him.  But  although  sheol^  a  state  of  separation,  will 
be  full  of  days  ;  sheol,  a  state  o^  destruction^  never  will  be 
full.  Solomon  says,  "  Sheol  and  destruction Sive  never  full: 
*'  so  the  eyes  of  man  are  never  satisfied.''^ ^  If  this  destruc- 
tion meant  annihilation,  then  Solomon  would  not  have  said, 
**  Sheol  and  dest)  action  are  before  the  Lord.''^  If  those  who 
go  to  sheol,  are  to  be  annihilated,  then  that  is  the  very  city 
of  refuge,  to  which  God's  incorrigible  enemies  would  flee,  af- 
ter they  have  called  in  vain  for  the  rocks  and  mountains  to 
fall  upon  them,  and  hide  them  from  his  presence.  But  in 
Ps.  cxxxix:  7,  mentioned  in  number  six,  above ;  David  says, 
"  Whither  sliall  I  go  from  thy  Spirit  ?  or  whither  shall  I 
flee  from  thy  presence  ?  If  I  ascend  up  into  heaven,  thou 
art  there;  if  I  make  my  bed  in  s/eeo/,  behold  thou  art  there,  "c 
Dr.  Campbell  says,  "  It  is  plain  that  in  the  Old  Testa- 
"  ment,  the  most  profound  silence  is  observed  in  regai'd  to 
**  the  state  of  the  deceased,  their  joys,  or  sorrows,  happiness 
*'  or  misery;"  that  sheol  "is  always  represented  under  those 
"figures  which  suggest  something  dreadful,  dark  and  «z/e«^." 
In  making  these  remarks,  he  probably  had  his  eye,  upon 
such  passages  as  that  in  which  David  says,  *'  Let  the  wick- 
*'  ed  be  ashamed,  and  let  them  be  silent  in  sheoL''''^  But  let 
it  be  recollected  that  this  great  man  declined  the  "  enumera- 
"  tion  and  examination  of  all  the  passages  in  both  Testa- 
"  ments  wherein  the  word  is  found,"  as  an  endless  task.  If 
he  had  examined  Ez.  xxxii.  21,  quoted  above,  in  which  a 
heatlien  is  represented  as  speaking  "  outof  the  midst  of  sAeo/," 
would  he  have  said  that  this  was  "  always  represented"  as 
silent  ?  The  truth  is,  it  is  sometimes  represented  in  one  light 
and  sometimes  in  the  other.  Its  silence  denotes  dismay, 
and  its  utterance  is  the  language  of  persevering  impiety,  and 
hopeless  importunity;  weeping,  wailing,  and  gnashing  of 

a  Prov.  xxvii.  20.  c  In.  No.  6.    this  is  among  the 

b  ProT.  XV.  11.  contrattl,\n'S(^.  7,  it  is  recognis- 

ed as  A  probable,  it  might  bejustlj 
added  to  tiiose  which  are  deem- 
d  Ps.  xxxi,  17.  ed  certain, 

Ff     > 


234 

teeth.  Between  these  two  representations  there  is  no  incoH- 
sistency.  Precisely  the  same  diversity  occurs  in  our  Sa- 
viour's representations  of  the  day  of  judgment ;  as  they  are 
found  in  Matt.  xxii.  11 — IS,  and  xxv.  41 — 46.  In  one  of 
these  passages  the  convict  is  represented  as  "  speechless  ;** 
in  the  other,  as  justifying  himself.  But  in  both  cases,  whe- 
ther they  be  Jews  or  Gentiles,  they  are  sent  to  deserved 
punishment;  for  *'  the  wicked  shall  be  turned  into  sheolf  and 
*'  all  the  nations  that  forget  God.''*  From  this  all  their  ho- 
nours and  pleasures  cannot  preserve  them.  Though  they 
"were  '*  clothed  in  purple  and  fine  linen,  and  fared  sumptu- 
ously every  day ;'  they  are  liable  at  any  moment,  to  have 
it  said  to  them,  "  thou  fool,  this  night  thy  soul  shall  be  re- 
quired of  thee."  "  They  spend  their  days  in  wealth,  and  in 
a  moment  go  down  to  sheol.*\  Though  in  this  world  they 
wei'e  protected  from  the  heat,  by  tents  of  state,  and  roofs  of 
cedar,  by  refreshing  air  and  every  healthful  and  exhilarating 
potion,  it  shall  be  fti»'  otherwise  there*  *'  Drought  and  heat 
**  consume  the  snow  waters  :  so  doth  slieol  those  which  have 
**  sinned.''*  Although  God  is  not  cruel  but  just,  in  thus  con- 
suming them  for  ever,  without  the  possibility  of  annihila- 
tion or  restitution,  Solomon  calls  their  state  of  punishment 
crueLy  on  account  of  the  intensity  and  the  duration  of  their 
torments.  **  J  ealousy*^  is  cruet  as  sheol.  The  coals  thereof  are 
coalH  of  fire,  which  hath  a  most  vehement  flame."e  Thus  did 
the  rich  man  in  the  gospel  find  it  If  his  torment  be  sorrow 
and  misery^  then  the  Old  Testament  is  not  si  lent  on  this  sub- 
ject, as  Dr.  Campbell  has,  without  examination,  asserted  it 
to  be. 

2. 
HADES. 
We  arc  already  informed  by  Mr.  Balfour,  "  that  the  word 
"  Hades  is  only  used  eleven  times  in  the  New  Testament. 
**  It  is  rendered  in  the  common  version  once  grave,  and  in 
all  the  other  ten  places,  by  the  word  heli.^\  Two  of  these 
passages  are  the  same  declaration  of  our  Saviour,  reported 
by  two  Evangelists.  "  And  thou  C'apcrnaum  !  which  art 
exalted  to  heaven,  shalt  be  thrust  down  to  hades.*\  'J'his  is 
tantamount  to  a  denunciation  of  the  prophet  Obadiah  against 

a  Pa    ix.  17- 

b  Job,  xxi.  13. 

c  Jol>,  xxiv.  19, 

d   Thtti  is,  the  jealousj  of  G  od,  as  id  the  second  commandraent. 

c  Cant.  viii.  0. 

f  Chap,  i,  Hcc.  3,  g  Matt.  xi.  23.    Luke  x.  15. 


236 

Edom.  **  Though  thou  exalt  thyself  as  the  eagle,  and  thougli 
thou  set  thy  nest  among  the  stars,  thence  will  1  bring  thee 
down,  saith  the  Lord."  In  the  verse  immediately  preceding, 
the  prophet  informs  us  that  this  exaltation  of  the  Edomites 
to  the  stars  was  in  their  own  conceit.  "  The  pride  of  thy 
heart  hath  deceived  thee."  They  thought  their  fortress  in 
the  rock,  to  he  the  summit  of  safety ;  but  God  thr'catens  their 
downfall.  So  the  people  of  Capernaum  tliought  that  they  had 
attained  the  pinnacle  of  prosperity,  and  that  their  happiness 
was  to  be  permanent.  But  Christ  lets  them  know  that  their 
fall  shall  be  as  low  as  their  imaginary  elevation  was  exalt- 
ed. What  divine  justice  threatened,  divine  faithfulness 
doubtless  executed. 

There  are  four  instances  in  which  hades  appears  to  denote 
the  state  of  separate  spirits,  whose  bodies  are  in  the  grave. 
Peter  quotes  David's  prophecy  concerning  Clirist's  resur- 
rection, and  the  consequent  re-union  of  his  human  soul  and 
body;  *'  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  Aa(/t?s,  nor  suffer 
thine  holy  one  to  see  corruption."  The  Apostle  then  adds. 
"  His  soul  was  not  left  in  hades,  neither  his  flesh  did  see 
corruption."*  As  Christ's  vicarious  and  law  ^satisfying  death 
removes  the  sting  of  his  people's  death  ;  so  his  resurrection 
is  a  victory  over  hades,  by  securing  the  happy  re  uniun  of 
the  souls  and  bodies  of  his  people.  Therefore  the  Spirit 
says,  "  O  death !  where  is  thy  sting?  O  hades  !  whei-e  is  thy 
victory  ?"'»  The  divine  Jesus  asserts  his  victory,  wlien  ad- 
dressing John  at  Patmos :  "  I  am  the  First  and  the  La^t:  I 
"  am  He  that  liveth  and  was  dead ;  and  behold !  I  am  alive  for 
**  evermore,  Amen ;  and  have  the  keys  oi hades  and  of  death. "« 
In  some  of  these  passages,  as  also  in  Hos.  xiii.  14.  the  state 
of  eternal  punishmx?nt  may  be  intended ;  though  I  cannot  see 
any  reason  for  supposing  that  tlie  word  ijravexs  a  correct 
translathm,  unless  the  gejieral  place  of  departed  spiiits  be 
intended  by  this  word,  as  is  sometimes  the  (;ase. 

In  the  hve  remaining  instances,  a-  in  the  two  first,  men- 
tioned above,  it  is  intended  to  point  out  the  place  of  torment, 
or  the  inhabitants  of  that  world  of  woe.  When  our  ^Saviour 
says,  "  the  gates  of  hades  shall  not  prevail  against"'^  his 
church,  I  understand  him  as  referring  to  the  inhabitants  of 
hell,  especially  those  who  were  high  in  com  aaml :  foi-  such 
♦characters  usually  occupied  the  gates  of  Jerusalem,  and  oth- 

a  Acts,  ii.  27  31. 
b  1  Cor.  XV,  55 
c  Rev  J.  18, 
d  Matt.  xTi.  18. 


286 

ei-  cities.  Job  "  went  out  to  the  gate."  "  Mordacai  came 
before  the  king's  gate.'*  Daviil  the  king  "  went  up  to  the 
chamber  over  the  gate."  Isaiah  says  to  the  otiicers  of  gov- 
ernment and  tlie  people  at  large,  "  Howl,  0  gate !  cry,  O 
city !  thou,  whole  Palestina,  art  (iissolved."  *'  in  the  city  is 
*'  left  desolation,  and  the  gate  is  smitten  with  destruction  ;'* 
that  is,  tiiere  is  desolation  among  the  people,  and  destruction 
among  their  rulers.  Thus  the  gates  of  their  enemies  pi  e- 
vailed  against  them.  But  concerning  the  church,  Christ 
says,  "  the  gates  of  /t«c/es,"  that  is  the  devil  and  his  legions, 
"  shall  not  prevail  against  it." 

Although  the  devil  and  his  legions  shall  never  prevail 
against  the  cliurch,  tliey  are  said  to  destroy  many  of  the  human 
race.  "And  1  looked,  and  behold  a  pale  horse:  and  his  name 
"  tljat  sat  on  him  was  Death,  and  hades  followed  with  him, 
*•  And  power  was  given  unto  them  over  the  fourth  part  of 
*'  the  earth,  to  kill  with  sword,  and  with  hunger,  and  with 
"  death,  and  with  the  beasts  of  the  eai'th.''*  As  iSheol  is 
sometimes  connected  with  the  word  destruction^  so  Hades  is 
here  connected  with  the  work  of  destruction :  and  let  it  be 
observed  tliat  it  is  mentioned  as  following  death,  not  preced- 
ing it  ,* — as  following  with  death,  not  waiting  until  the  genei'al 
resurrection.  As  soon  as  the  sinner  dies,  his  soul  enters 
the  place  of  torment,  as  the  soul  of  the  believer  enters  Para- 
dise. The  effect  of  the  resurrection  and  the  general  judg- 
ment is,  to  re-unite  their  bodies  to  their  souls,  and  increase 
their  misery  or  their  bliss.  When  the  souls  of  the  wicked 
are  separated  from  their  bodies,  and  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire, 
wheje  the  rich  man's  soul  was  tormented,  while  his  body 
was  in  tlie  grave,  this  is  the  first  death.  When  this  separa- 
tion ceases  and  their  souls  and  bodies  are  punished  together 
in  this  lake  of  fire,  this  is  called  the  second  death.  "  And  the 
**  sea  gave  up  the  dead  which  were  in  it ;  and  death  and  hades 
'*  delivered  up  the  dead  which  were  in  them:  and  they  were 
^'  judged  every  man  according  to  their  works.  And  death 
"  and  hades  were  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire.  This  is  the  second 
"  death."'^  Many  millions  of  sinners  have  perished  in  the 
sea ;  especially  in  the  general  deluge,  when  there  was  no- 
thing but  sea.''  Tiiese  dead  bodies  are  to  be  delivered  up.  But 
many  millions  of  sinners  have  pei-ished  on  the  land,  intend- 
ed by  '*  deatW''  in  the  text.  These  dead  bodies  also  shall  be 
delivered  up  at  the  resurrection.     All  the  souls  belonging  to 

a  Rev.  Ti.  8.  c  See   Horseley,  on   Christ's  de- 

fa  Ker.  XX.  J  3,  14.  scent  into  Hell. 


237 

these  bodies  are  in  hades^  with  the  rich  man.  Therefore  it 
is  said  "  hades  delivered  up  the  dead,"  that  is,  the  souls  which 
were  ii>  it.  *'  And  they  were  judged  every  man  according  to 
•*  their  works.  And  [after  the  judgment,]  death,  [that  is, 
"  their  bodies,  which  were  once  dead,]  and  hades,  [that  is, 
"  their  souls,  which  were  before  in  the  lake  without  their 
*'  bodies,]  were  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  [together.]  This  is 
"  the  second  death."  I  know  that  the  whole  tribe  of  Uni- 
versalists,  who  believe  the  devil  a  mere  personification,  pre- 
tend also  that  death  and  hades,  in  this  text,  are  mere  per- 
sonifications or  nonentities  :  and  they  would  wisely  teach  us, 
that  these  nonentities  are  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire,  that  they 
may  be  more  completely  nonentified.  To  call  this  a  second 
death  or  a  first  death  either,  would  be  strange  indeed,  since 
there  is  nothing  to  die!  Mr.  Hume  could  have  saved  them 
this  trouble,  by  proving  that  sinners  are  nonentities.  But  if 
it  be  true,  that  God  is  a  real  being,  and  a  just  judge; — and 
if  it  be  true  that  the  devil  and  the  devil's  children  have  a  re- 
al existence,  then  it  is  also  true  that  "  Tophet  is  ordained  of 
*'  old ;  yea,  for  the  king  it  is  prepared :  he  hath  made  it  deep 
"  and  large :  the  pile  thereof  is  fire  and  much  wood  ,•  the 
"  breath  of  the  Lord,  like  a  stream  of  brimstone,  doth  kin- 
*'  die  it."  What  could  the  Prophet  mean  here,  by  that  fiery 
Tophet^  prepared  for  the  king,  and  kindled  by  the  breath  of 
an  angry  God,  but  that  "everlasting  fiie,  prepared  for  the 
devil  and  his  angels,"  into  which  the  wicked  are  to  be  driv- 
en by  the  breath  of  the  Lord,  in  the  sentence  of  condemna- 
tion, at  the  day  of  judgment? 

The  only  remaining  instance  in  which  the  New  Testa- 
ment gives  the  name  o^  hades  to  this  state  of  punishment,  is 
in  the  case  of  the  rich  man.  *'  And  in  hades,  he  lifted  up  his 
eyes,  being  in  torments."^  This  has  been  correctly  referretl 
to,  in  support  of  my  five  arguments  severally.  This  case 
shews  the  helplessness  of  the  sinner,  and  the  consequent  im- 
possibility of  his  restitution  from  hell :  "  They  which  would 
•*  pass  from  hence  to  you,  cannot ;  neither  can  they  pass  to  us 
'*  that  would  come  from  thence."  From  these  words  their 
state  must  be  eternally  fixed ;  and  there  is  as  great  a  con- 
trast between  the  eternal  destiny  of  the  one,  and  that  of  the 
other,  as  between  heaven  and  hell.  In  these  words  it  is  also 
plainly  denied  that  their  condition  ever  will  or  can  be  chang- 
ed. As  a  reason  for  tliis  it  is  affirmed  that  he  is  in  hades^  in 
torments  ;  that  is,  he  is  in  Iiell,  the  place  of  eternal  j)unish- 

a  Luke  x\i.  23. 


238 

meiit  That  which  is  aflarmed  in  one  verse,  is  also  plainly 
implied  in  another  ',  where  "  Ahraham  said,  son,  remember 
"  that  thou,  in  thy  life  time,  receivedst  thy  good  things,  and 
**  likewise  Lazarus  evil  things  :  but  now  he  is  comforted  and 
'*  thou  art  tormented."  My  opponent  would  make  you  be- 
lieve that  hell  is  in  this  life,  and  that  it  is  to  be  seen  and  ex- 
perienced in  scenes  of  revelry  and  debauchery :  but  we  are 
here  informed  that  m  this  life,  the  rich  man  received  his 
comforts,  and  his  good  things;  and  his  hell  was,  to  lift  up 
his  affrighted  eyes,  and  to  utter  his  unavailing  cries,  in  a 
tormenting  flame,  after  he  was  dead  and  buried. 

It  is  with  reluctance,  I  confess,  that  the  quibbling  of  Mr. 
Balfour  and  my  opponent  about  his  being  on  a  level  with  La- 
zarus, is  here  noticed.  The  former  speaks  as  follows,  viz: 
*•  Whatever  place  hades  is,  in  which  the  rich  man  is  here  re- 
"  presented  as  in  torment,  it  is  very  evident  that  Abraham 
"  and  Lazarus  were  also  in  hades.  Though  spoken  of  as  at 
"  some  distance  from  each  other,  yet  they  were  within  sight 
**  and  hearing,  and  could  converse  together.  The  one  is  not 
"  represented  as  in  heaven,  and  the  other  in  hell :  no ;  they 
**  are  represented  as  in  the  same  place,  and  on  a  level  with 
"  each  other."*  In  addition  to  tliis,  if  I  mistake  not,  my 
opponent  has  endeavoured  to  pi'ove  this  level  by  means  of 
the  gulph  which  was  fixed  between  them :  understanding  by 
this  gulph,  a  body  of  water,  which,  of  course,  seeks  its  level. 
"  In  fact,"  says  he,  "  the  whole  scene  is  laid  upon  a  plain, 
"  which  was  supposed  to  be  under  ground  ;  every  word  in  the 
"  original,  signifying  motionf  implies  that  the  places  each  side 
"  of  the  gulph,  were  on  a  level  with  each  otlier;  there  is  not 
**  one  word  which  conveys  the  idea  of  ascending  or  of  de- 
*■'■  scending^  but  every  expression  implies  distance,  and  not 
'*  height  nor  depth."** 

In  answer  to  these  sage  remarks,  I  would  ask,  was  it  not 
strange  for  the  rich  man,  lying  near  a  vast  body  of  water,  to 
ask  a  man  on  the  other  side  of  it,  to  bring  him  one  drop  ? 
But  stop :  this  body  of  water  was  not  so  large,  for  they  could 
converse  across  it.  Of  course,  it  must  have  been  navigable 
by  a  canoe.  Why  then  did  Abraham  call  it  impassable  ? 
But  why  should  they  wish  to  pass  it  ?  These  gentlemen 
have  proved  that  they  were  in  the  same  place ;  in  the  same 
state,  although  they  had  the  gul])h  between  them,  and  although 
they  were  afar  off  from  each  other.     Is  it  true  that  two  peo- 

a  Cliup.  i.  Sec.  2. 
b  Minutes  p.  135. 


289 

pie  cannot  speak  to  each  other  on  the  river  which  is  neai* 
us,  witliout  being  in  the  same  vessel,  and  without  being  on  a 
level  ?  Cannot  one  man  from  the  top  of  a  seventy-four,  ad- 
dress another  in  the  bottom  of  a  wherry  ?  and  must  Penn- 
sylvania and  Jersey  be  the  same  state,  because  they  can 
both  be  seen  across  the  Delaware  ?  But  there  is  one  wurd 
signifying  motion,  which  appears  to  have  escaped  the  notice 
of  my  opponent.  "  In  hell  lie  lifted  up  his  eyes."  Does  this 
imply  that  he  gave  them  a  horizontal  direction  ?  What  did 
he  mean  just  now,  when  he  told  you  that  he  had  been  in- 
formed of  a  general  rumour  through  the  city,  last  evening, 
that  my  cause  was  looking  up  ?  Did  he  mean  tliat  it  was 
thought  to  be  on  a  level  with  his  ?  Let  it  therefore  be  re- 
membered that  unless  we  can  reconcile  palpable  absurdities, 
then  tliere  is  not  one  iota  of  evidence  to  prove  that  Lazarus 
and  the  rich  man  were  in  the  same  place.  Their  seeing  and 
speaking  will  not  prove  it,  unless  we  are  acquainted  with 
the  organs  of  separate  spirits.  The  contraiy  conclusion 
should  be  drawn  from  the  express  words  of  scripture.  The 
one  was  *'  in  hell,"  and  the  other  "  afar  off;''  the  one  was 
**  in  torments,"  and  the  other  " in  Abraham's  bosom"  If 
torment  and  comfort  are  the  same  thing,  and  heaven  and  hell 
the  same  place,  then  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus  were  in  the^ 
same  state. 

It  has  already  been  shewn,  that  my  opponent  and  his  co- 
adjutors consider  this  passage  of  scripture  a  parable;  and  a 
parable,  they  think,  can,  with  a  little  ingenuity,  be  made  to 
mean  any  thing  or  nothing.  When  it  is  most  convenient, 
they  scruple  not  to  make  glaring  insinuations,  that  what 
they  call  parables,  contain  falsehoods.  But  let  us  see  what 
they  have  done  in  the  elucidation  of  this  parable,  as  they 
would  have  it  to  be.  Mr.  Ballou  in  his  "  Notes  on  the  Pa- 
rables,"* makes  the  rich  man  to  stand  for  the  Aaronic  High 
Priest,  and  the  pious  beggar  for  the  Gentiles.  Tlie  death  of 
Lazarus,  means  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the  death 
of  the  rich  man  the  close  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation.  His 
being  in  hades,  means  conviction  of  sin,  and  his  seeing  the 
beggar  in  Abraham's  bosom,  means  his  witnessing  the  con- 
version of  the  Gentiles  to  Abraham's  faith.  My  opponent 
agrees  with  this  interpretation,  and  thinks  that  he  makes  a 
slight  improvement  by  interpreting  '^Abraham  and  his  bosom, 
the  gospel  dispensation."b  Aa  those  who  are  run  mad  for  alle- 

a  Parable  38. 

b  Lectures  p  302.    Not.e. 


249 

gory,  can  never  be  satisfied  with  a  parable,  until  tliey  have 
taiight  it  to  go  on  all-fours,  my  opponent  has  spai'ed  uo  pains 
in  inquiring  after  the  ridi  man's  five  brethren.  If  he  has,  at 
different  times,  had  different  opinions  upon  this  subject,  it 
is  an  error  to  which  all  great  men  are  liable,  in  sucli  impor- 
tant pursuits. 

Previous  to  his  debate  witli  Mr  Bishop,  in  the  Northern 
Liberties,  he  delivered  a  popular  sermon,  in  which  he  is  said 
to  have  used  the  following  words,  viz  :  "  any  man  of  sense,  or 
*'  common  understanding,mustknow,  that,  by  the  five  breth- 
*'  ren,  is  to  be  understood  the  five  books  of  Moses."*  By  the 
same  authority,  we  are  publicly  informed,  (and  I  believe, 
without  contradiction)  that  my  opponent  has  since  relinquish- 
ed that  interpretation,  which  he  said  that  "any  man  of  sense 
or  common  understanding,  must"  adopt ;  and  has  very  com- 
plaisantly  fallen  in  with  Mr.  Ballou's  opinion,  that  the  five 
brethren  are  the  same  as  the  five  foolish  virgins.  This  is 
evidently  an  improvement;  and  goes  to  shew  that  this  is  an 
age  of  improvement.  The  first  interpretation  was,  1  think 
myself,  a  little  exceptionable;  as  there  was  evidently  no 
more  reason,  for  believing  that  these  five  brethren  meant 
the  five  books  of  Moses,  than  that  it  meant  certain  five  Ca- 
naanizhig  cities  in  the  land  of  Egypt  ;b  or  the  five  changes 
of  raiment  which  Joseph  gave  to  Benjamin  ;i  or  the  five 
porches  of  the  pool  of  Bethesda;''  or  the  five  barley  loaves 
which  fed  so  many  thousands.^  To  make  them  mean  the  five 
books  of  Moses,  is  as  arbitrary,  as  to  make  them  figurative 
of  the  five  horses  which  were  sent  to  the  Syrian  camp;*  or  of 
the  five  rams,  five  he-goats,  and  the  five  lambs,  Mhich  Na- 
shon,  the  son  of  Aminidab  offered  *'  for  a  sacrifice  of  peace- 
offering  ;''f  or  the  five  sparrows  that  were  sold  for  two  far- 
things ;%  or  the  five  golden  emrods,  and  the  five  golden  mice, 
which  the  Philistines  offered  for  a  trespass  offering.*'*^  I 
think,  therefore,  upon  mature  deliberation,  that  my  oppo- 
nent was  right  in  discarding  this  scheme,  although,  in  do- 
ing so,  he  is  stigmatized  by  his  former  declaration,  as  a 
man  destitute  of  *'  sense  or  common  understanding.'* 

a  See  Mr.  G.  Bishop's  "  Public  Controversy,"  published  in  Philadephia,  A.D. 
1822,  p.  148.  Note, 
b    Is.  xix.  18. 
c  John  V.  2 
d  John  vi.  9. 
e  2  Kinf^s  vii.  13, 
f  Numb.  vii.  17. 

5;  Luke  xii.  6. 
)  1  Sam.  vi.  4. 
i  Gen.  xlv.  22. 


241 

It  has  already  been  admitted  that  making  these  five  bre- 
thren to  mean  the  five  foolish  virgins  instead  of  the  five 
books  of  Moses,  is  a  real  improvement.  Although  I  am 
myself  an  advocate  of  the  old  way,  and  therefore  unfit 
to  engage  largely  in  the  improvements  of  the  present 
day,  I  would  modestly  suggest  the  possibility  of  an  im- 
provement even  upon  this  interpretation.  Miglit  it  not  be 
more  plausible  to  go  in  search  of  some  quintuple,  of  the  same 
sex  with  these  five  brethren,  as  well  as  of  the  same  moral 
character?  This  disagreement  of  sex  would  as  effectually 
prevent  some  from  identifying  them  with  tlie  five  foolish  vir- 
gins, as  with  Abigail's  "five  damsels."*  Being  driven  off 
of  this  ground,  we  had  better  pass  by  Joseph's  five  brethren 
whom  he  introduced  to  Pharaoh,"*  and  the  five  sons  of  Mi- 
cal  and  Adriel,c  and  the  five  sons  of  Zerah,d  as  being  rather 
doubtful  characters.  It  is  true,  this  would  be  no  solid  objec- 
tion, if  they  were  the  only  fives  mentioned  in  scripture  :  but 
there  are  many  others  much  more  to  the  purpose ;  and  among 
these  we  can  choose  that  one,  which  will  most  effectually 
help  to  allegorize  the  rich  man  out  of  torment.  Since  there- 
fore, we  have  determined  that  these  five  brethren  do  not 
mean  the  penteteuch,  nor  the  foolish  virgins,  may  they  not 
mean  the  five  husbands  of  the  Samaritan  woman  ?e  or  the 
five  spies  that  stole  Micah's  Gods  ?f  or  the  five  Lords  of  the 
Philistine  Pentarchy  ?g  or  the  five  kings  of  Midian,  whom 
Moses  slew?'^  or  the  five  kings  of  the  Amorites,  whom 
Joshua  hanged  upon  five  trees  ?»  These  are  unexceptiona- 
ble resemblances,  as  to  sex  and  character.  They  are  as 
much  like  the  five  brethren,  as  the  Universalists  are  like  the 
Unitarians:  and  all  of  them,  whether  brethren,  husbands, 
spies,  Lords,  Kings,  Universalists,  or  Unitai'ians,  are  very 
much  of  apiece. 

But  after  all,  there  is  a  great  difference  between  faith  and 
fancy;  between  expounding  scripture,  and  darkening  coun- 
sel by  words  without  knowledge.  I  would  rather,  with  the 
Apostle  Paul, "  speak  five  words  witli  my  understanding,"j 
than  to  form  ten  thousand  heretical  conjectures  concerning 
tliese  five  brethren,  which  are  intended  only  to  smother  the 
plain  truth.  This  passage  is  plain,  whether  it  be  called  his- 
tory or  parable.     In  eitlier  ease,  it  can  mean  nothing  less, 

a  1  Sara.  xxv.  42.  f  Judg.  xviii.  2. 

b  Gen.  Ixvii    2.  g  1  Sam.  vi.  16.  17. 

c  1  Sam.  xxi.  8.  h  Num.  xxxi.  8. 

d  1  Chr.  ii.  6.  i  Josh.  x.  5.  26. 

«  Fn.  iv.  18.  j  1  Cor.  jriv.  19. 


242 

than  that,  immediately  after  death,  the  soul  of  a  believer 
goes  to  the  liappiness  of  heaven,  and  that  of  an  unbeliever 
to  the  torments  of  hell;  between  which  two  states,  there  is 
an  absolutely  eternal  separation.  The  language  of  Abra- 
ham communicates  thus  much,  and  thus  the  rich  man  evi- 
dently understood  it :  for  he  gives  up  all  hope  of  his  own  sal- 
vation; and  asks,  as  his  last  request,  that  his  brethren  may 
not  come  tliitlier  to  aggravate  his  torment  five  fold.  He  is 
not  consoled  with  the  Unsversalist  salvo,  that  although  he 
cannot  pass  the  giilph  himself,  God  can  and  will  take  him 
over.  Instead  of  this,  he  considers  the  words  of  Abraham, 
as  God's  infallible  declaration,  that  he  never  shall  pass 
from  hell  to  heaven,  nor  have  his  torments  mitigated  by  one 
drop  of  comfort. 

But  instead  of  placing  this  impassable  gulph  between  be- 
lievers and  unbelievers  in  the  eternal  world,  Mr.  Ballou  and 
my  opponent  would  place  it  between  the  Jews  and  Gentiles  in 
this  world  !  the  very  contrai-y  of  which  is  declared  by  the 
Spirit  of  Christ.  '*  Ft<r  he  is  our  peace,  who  hath  made 
**  both  one,  and  hath  broken  down  the  middle  wall  of  parti- 
*'  tion  between  us  ;  having  abolished  in  his  flesh  the  enmity, 
•*  even  the  law  of  commandments  contained  in  ordinances; 
"  for  to  make  in  himself  of  twain,  one  new  man,  so  making 
*' peace;  and  that  he  might  reconcile  btith  unto  God  in  one 
**  body  by  tlie  cross,  having  slain  the  enmity ;  and  came,  and 
"  preached  peace  to  you  which  were  afar  off,  [to  the  Gentiles,] 
"and  to  them  that  were  nigh,  [to  the  Jews.]"*  What  a  pity, 
that  when  Christ  has  pulled  down  the  wall  of  separation  be- 
tween Jews  and  Gentiles,  the  Universalists  should  endeavour 
to  fix  an  imi>assable  gulph  between  them !  But  the  truth  is, 
they  found  this  gulph  in  their  way;  and  they  were  as  much 
at  a  loss  to  know  where  to  put  it,  as  they  were  to  find  ac- 
commodations for  tlieir  five  unbelieviug  brethren;  and  as  is 
often  tlie  case  with  })revaricating  witnesses,  they  placed  it 
exactly  where  it  ought  not  to  be. 

The  absurdity  of  this  scheme  is  equally  great  in  another 
respect.  The  beggar  *'died  ;"  and  after  death,  those  good 
angels,  whicli  my  o])ponent  would  consider  personifications, 
or  non-entities,  carried  his  soul  to  happiness.  The  rich  man 
also  "  died,'*  and  his  body  was  buried  ;  but  after  death,  his 
soul  was  carried,  by  personifications  of  another  description, 
to  the  world  of  torment.     Although  in  this  world  he  asked 

a  r.[ih.  ii.  14—17. 


243 

no  mercy,  he  calls  for  it  there,  where  it  cannot  he  found. 
Abraham  reminds  him  of  the  condition  in  which  he  and  La- 
zarus were  placed  in  their  "  life-time,"  but  tells  them,  that 
**  now"  after  their  death  and  burial,  their  conditions  are 
greatly  changed.  To  shew  that  they  were  really  dead,  the 
rich  man  requests  that  Lazarus  may  be  sent  "  from  tlie  dead," 
and  Abraham  assures  him  that  an  unbeliever  cannot  be  sav- 
ed, "  though  one  rose  from  the  dead."  In  the  face  of  this- 
accumulated  and  unequivocal  testimony  of  inspiration,  the 
scheme  which  we  are  opposing,  requires  us  to  believe  that 
there  was  no  death  in  the  case ;  but  that  this  whole  account 
relates  to  the  transactions  of  this  life. 

You  can  scarcely  conceive  of  tlie  extent  of  that  barbanty 
with  which  these  people  treat  the  word  of  God,  until  you 
make  a  close  comparison  of  their  views  with  the  oracles  of 
truth.  This  we  shall  now  endeavour  to  do,  in  a  paraphrase 
which  shall  incorporate  the  features  of  their  interpretation, 
with  the  sacred  text.  This  method  of  exposing  error  is  used 
with  reverence  to  God,  and  love  to  your  souls :  for  conse- 
quences, let  the  corrupters  of  Revelation  be  answerable.  The 
Universalist  paraphrase  is  as  follows,  viz.  "  There  was  a 
*'  certain  rich  man  [the  Aaron ic  High  Priest,]  which  was 
"  clothed  in  purple  and  fine  linen,  and  fared  sumptuously 
"  every  day.  And  there  was  a  certain  beggar,  named  La- 
*'  zarus,  [the  Gentiles,]  which  was  laid  at  his  gate,  full  of 
**  sores,  and  desiring  to  be  fed  with  the  crumbs  which  fell 
*'  from  the  rich  man's  table,  [the  High  Priest's  table.] 
"  Moreover,  the  dogs,  [the  Apostles]  came  and  licked  his 
'*  sores.  And  it  came  to  pass,  that  the  beggar,  [the  Gentiles] 
"  died,  [became  converted]  and  was  carried  by  the  angels 
"  [the  personifications,  or  non-entities,  or  these  dogs,  the 
**  Apostles,]  into  Abraham's  bosom,  [the  Gospel  dispensa- 
*'  tion.]  The  rich  man  [the  Aaronic  High  Priest,]  also  died, 
**  [was  ex-communicated]  and  was  buried,  [alive]  and  in  hell 
"  [in  this  life,]  he  lifted  up  his  eyes  [to  an  exact  level,]  being 
"  in  torments  [of  conviction,]  and  seeth  Abraham,  [the  gos- 
**  pel]  afar  off,  [very  near  in  the  same  place,]  and  Lazarus, 
"  [the  Gentiles]  in  his  bosom,  [its  dispensation.]  And  he 
"cried,  and  said,  Father  Abraham,  [gospel !]  have  mercy 
<*  on  me ;  and  send  Lazarus  [the  Gentiles]  that  he  may  dip 
**  the  tip  of  his  finger  in  water,  and  cool  my  tongue;  for  I 
*'  am  tormented  in  this  flame.  But  Abraham,  [the  gos- 
**  pel]  said,  son,  [Jews]  remember,  that  thou  in  thy  life-time 
'*  [and  thou  hast  never  died,]  receivedst  thy  good  things^ 


244 

**  and  likewise  Lazarus  [the  Gentiles,]  evil  things :  but 
**  now  he  is  comforted,  and  thou  art  tormented.  And  besides 
'*  all  this,  between  us  [the  Gentiles,]  and  you  [the  Jews,]  there 
**  is  a  great  gulph  fixed ;  [in  the  room  of  that  middle  wall  of 
"  partition  which  is  broken  down,]  so  that  they  which  would 
**  pass  from  hence  to  you,  cannot ;  neither  can  tliey  pass  to 
*'  us,  that  would  come  from  thence.  Then  he,[the  High  Priest] 
'*said,  I  pray  thee  therefore.  Father,  [gospel,]  that  thou 
**  wouldst  send  him,  [tlie  Gentiles]  to  my  Father's  house,  [the 
**  Jews ;]  for  I  have  five  brethren,  [the  five  books  of  Moses, 
*'  or  the  five  foolish  Virgins,]  that  he  may  testify  unto  them, 
*'  lest  they  also  come  into  this  place  of  torment.  Abraham, 
*'  [the  gospel,]  saith  unto  him,  [the  High  Priest,]  they  [the 
**  five  books  of  Moses,  or  the  five  foolish  Virgins]  have  Moses 
*'  and  the  Prophets  ;  let  them  hear  them.  And  he  said,  nay, 
*'  Father  Abraham :  but  if  one  went  unto  them  from  the 
**  dead,  [before  he  dies,]  they  will  repent.  And  he  said  unto 
*'  him,  if  they  [the  five  books  or  Virgins]  hear  not  Moses 
**  and  the  Prophets,  neither  will  they  be  persuaded  though 
*•  one  rose  from  the  dead  [before  he  dies."]a 

But  if  it  be  true  tliat  God  is  not  to  be  mocked  with  impu- 
nity ; — if  it  be  true,  that  after  the  death  and  burial  of  the  bo- 
dy, the  soul  must  go  with  good  angels  to  Abraham's  bosom, 
or  with  evil  angels  to  the  place  of  torment ;  —and  if  it  be 
true,  that  that  Divine  Redeemer,  whose  blood  removed  the 
wall  of  partition  from  between  Jews  and  Gentiles,  has  given 
his  word,  that  none  shall  ever  pass  that  gulph  which  lies  be- 
tween Heaven  and  Hell ; — then  let  those  who  reject  or  tri- 
fle with  the  word  of  God,  repent  or  tremble. 

3. 
GEHENNA. 

In  the  Old  Testament  we  read  of  the  Valley  of  Hinnom,\, 
which  is  once«  called  by  the  Septuagint,  Gaienna,^  but  ne- 
ver Gehenna.e^  This  latter  word  Gehenna^  occurs  twelve 
times  in  the  New  Testament,  in  not  one  of  which,  does  it 
denote  the  Gaienna  of  the  Old  Testament,  althou^i  it  is 
generally  supposed,  and  perhaps,  correctly,  to  allude  to  that 
place.  It  is  as  correctly  supposed  that  our  Saviour  alluded 
to  the  Garden  of  Eden ^  when  he  said  to  the  dying  thief  '*  to 
day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise  f'^    which  word,g  is 

a  Luke  xvi.  19—31.  f  Luke  xxiu.  43. 

c  J<  bh.  xviii,  16- 

d  youewa  C  yfsyvte 


245 

repeatedly  used  in  the  Septuagint,a  to  signify  a  literal  earth- 
ly  garden,  orchard,  or  forest-b  But  there  is  often  a  great 
difference  between  the  thing  spoken  of,  and  the  thing  alluded 
to.  Our  Saviour  alluded  to  an  earthly  garden,  wliich  a 
man  enjoys  in  this  life ;  but  he  promised  to  take  the  repent- 
ing, believing,  and  praying  robber,  to  a  Paradise,  which  was 
to  be  enjoyed  by  his  soul,  after  death.  So  when  Joshua  the 
son  of  Nun,  spoke  of  the  Valley  of  Hinnoni,  or  Gaienna,  he 
meant  a  spot  of  ground  near  the  earthly  Jerusalem,  which, 
in  process  of  time,  became  a  scene  of  idolatry,  cruelty,  and 
pollution  ,-  and  in  which  place  worms  were  generally  found, 
and  a  fire  was  kept  up  a  long  time,  to  consume  the  carcases 
which  were  thrown  into  it.  But  let  it  be  noted  that  these 
worms  died,  and  tliis  fire  was  extinguished ',  and  while  it 
burned,  it  consumed  nothing  more  than  the  body  :  whereas 
the  Gehenna,  with  which  sinners  are  threatened  by  the  Di- 
Tine  Joshua,  the  son  of  God,  is  a  flame  which  seizes  the  soul 
immediately  after  death,  and  both  soul  and  body  after  the 
general  judgment;  and  in  addition  to  this,  it  is  a  flame  which 
*•  never  shall  be  quenched."  But  we  proceed  to  cite  all  the 
passages  in  which  it  occurs. 

'*  It  is  profitable  for  thee,  that  one  of  thy  members  should 
"  perish,  and  not  that  thy  whole  body  should  be  cast  into 
**  Gehenna.^"  *'  Whosoever  shall  say  thou  fool,  shall  be  in 
'*  danger  of  the  Gehenna  of  fire."  "  It  is  better  for  thee  to 
"  enter  into  life  with  one  eye,  rather  than  having  two  eyes, 
'<to  be  cast  into  the  ^ery  Gehenna.'*  "  Ye  make  him  [your 
**  proselyte,]  two  fold  more  the  child  of  Gehenna  than  your- 
'*  selves."  The  tongue  "  is  set  on  fire  of  Gehenna."  *'  Ye 
"  serpents,  ye  generation  of  vipers,  how  can  ye  escape  the 
"  damnation  of  Gehenna  V  "  Fear  not  them  which  kill  the 
**  body,  but  are  not  able  to  kill  the  soul :  but  rather  fear  him 
**  which  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  Gehenna.^' 
*'  Fear  him,  which,  after  he  hath  killed,  hath  power  to  cast 
"into  Gehenna''''  "It  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  into  life 
'*  maimed,  than  having  two  hands,  tQ  go  into  Gehenna,  into 
'<  the  fire  that  never  shall  be  quenched."  *'  It  is  better  for 
"  thee  to  enter  halt  into  life,  than  having  two  feet  to  be  cast 
"  into  Gehenna,  into  the  fire  that  never  shall  be  quenched." 
*■'  It  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God  with 
"  one  eye,  than  having  two  eyes  to  be  cast  into  the  fiery  Ge- 


a  Neh.    ii.  8.   Eecles.  in   5.    Cant.  iv.  1-5. 

b  Dnnt) 


246 

"  henna^  where  their  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not 
*•  quenclied."^ 

After  reading  the  ahovc  passages  of  Scripture,  any  plain 
and  pious  person  of  common  sense,  would  understand  the  Ge- 
henna  of  the  New  Testament,  to  he  quite  a  different  place 
from  the  Gaienna  of  the  Old  Testament,  although  the  one  al- 
ludes to  tlie  other,  and  is  illustrated  hy  it.  In  the  Valley  of 
Hiiinom,  the  worm  dies,  and  the  tire  is  quenched  :  but  in  Ge- 
henna,  "  their  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched.'.' 
In  Gaienna^ih^  body  only  is  consumed,  but  in  GeAew«a,  both 
soul  and  body.  And  here  it  will  not  do  to  argue,  as  Mr. 
Balfour  does  Aery  elaborately,  and  as  if  he  were  in  earnest,b 
that  the  soul  and  body  mean  nothing  but  our  mortal  part: 
for  men  can  kill  everything  that  is  mortal  about  us  ,•  but  the 
soul  here  spoken  of,  is  one  w  hich  our  Saviour  declares  they 
cannot  kill.  "  Fear  not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but  are 
'*  not  able  to  kill  the  soul ;  but  rather  fear  him  which  is 
"  able  to  destroy  botli  soul  and  body  in  Gehenna.''''^ 

Universalists  perceive  that  our  interpretation  of  the  above 
passages  is  very  much  strengthened  by  the  use  which  is  made 
in  them,  of  such  words  as  Jire,  destruction,  and  damnation ; 
and  accordingly,  they  spend  much  time  upon  these  topics. 
I  shall,  with  the  help  of  God,  attend  to  them,  as  concisely  as 
possible. 

(1.)  Fire,  Since  it  has  pleased  the  all  wise  God,  in  con- 
descension to  our  stupidity,  to  use  the  word  fire,  and  the 
phrase ^'re  a?id  brimsfonef  to  point  out  the  torments  of  the 
wicked,  or  the  means  or  agency  by  which  those  torments 
are  inflicted,  it  becomes  us  to  receive  these  and  similar  words 
and  expressions,  as  the  words  of  God  ;  and  not  to  be  asham- 
ed of  them,  on  account  of  the  profane  wit  of  men,  as  we  w  ould 
wish  Christ  not  to  be  ashamed  of  us  before  his  Father  and 
the  holy  angels.  Christians  will  not  cavil  at  these  words, 
and  quibble  about  them,  as  Dr.  Chauncey  has  done.  If  God 
has  plainly  declared  th'at  there  is  an  unquenchable  fire, 
which  shall  burn  the  soul  as  well  as  the  body,  a  christian 
will  not  contradict  him,  by  objections  drawn  from  the  qua- 
lities of  that  fire,  with  which  we  are  daily  conversant.  As 
well  might  he  draw  objections  from  that  water  which  our 
bodies  drink,  to  refute  the  doctrine  that  there  is  "  a  pure  ri- 
**■  ver  of  water  of  life,  clear  as  crystal,  proceeding  out  of  the 

a  Matt.  V.  29.  30.  22.  xviii.  9.  xxiii.  IS.    Jas,  iii.  6.    Matt    xxiii.  33.  x:  28. 
Luke  xii.  5.     Mk.  ix.  43.  45.  47. 
b  Chapt.  1.  Sect,  3.  c  Matt.  x.  28. 


247 

'•  throne  of  God  and  of  the  Lamb."*  Whatsoever  qualities 
may  be  found  in  our  lower  rivers,  there  is  in  Heaven,  a  ri- 
ver of  water,  which  shall  refresh  the  souls  and  the  spiritua- 
lized bodies  of  God's  people,  to  all  eternity :  and  whatsoever 
may  be  the  qualities  of  our  earthly  fires,  or  furnaces,  there 
is  a  Tophet,  a  lake  of  Jure,  in  hell,  which  shall  torment  the 
souls  and  bodies  of  the  finally  impenitent,  to  an  absolute 
eternity. 

The  existence  of  such  a  fire  after  the  day  of  judgment, 
and  its  existence  for  a  long  and  indefinite  duration,  was  ad- 
mitted by  Mr.  Winchester  himself;  though  he  denied  its  ab- 
solute eternity.  The  following  are  liis  words,  viz.  "After 
"  the  second  resurrecti<m  and  the  Judgment,  the  whole  globe 
"  shall  be  turned  into  a  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,  where 
"  the  wicked  shall  be  punished  for  ages  of  ages."b  In  the 
natural  progress  of  Universalism  toward  Atheism,  it  is  no 
wonder  that  many  of  Mr.  Winchester's  former  adherents, 
now  deny  that  there  is  to  be  a  general  judgment,  or  anyfu- 
ture  punishment  at  all.  In  defending  this  refinement  of  er- 
ror, they  must  of  course  say  something  of  that  fire,  which 
Mr.  Winchester  thought  would  torment  the  wicked  after 
death.  They  all,  with  one  consent,  quote  that  text  in  which 
God  says,  "  He  is  like  a  refiner's yiVe,  and  like  fuller's  soap ; 
*'  and  he  shall  sit  as  a  refiner  and  purifier  of  silver,  and  he 
"sliall  purify  the  sons  of  Levi ;  and  purge  them  as  gold  and 
"  silver,  that  they  may  offer  unto  the  Lord,  an  offering  in 
"  righteousness.  "<^  Mr.  Ballon  quotes  a  number  of  passages 
in  which  fire  is  mentioned,  and  tlien  selects  one  which  he 
calls  his  key  text.*^  He  then  says,  *'  By  my  key  I  learn,  that 
"the  fire  which  causes  the  wicked  to  suffer,  has  the  power 
"  of  salvation  even  for  the  sufferers.  So  in  all  the  passages 
"  recited,  where  fire  is  mentioned,  it  is  evident  the  same  fire 
"  is  intended."  *'  All  the  passages  whicli  allude  to  a  dispen- 
"  sation  of  fire,  which  I  have  observed  in  this  work,"  con- 
tinues Mr.  Ballou,  "  are  direct  evidences  to  prove  tlie  des- 
"truction  of  sin  and  all  sinful  works,  thepujification  of  sin- 
•*  ners,  and  their  eternal  reconciliation  to  holiness  and  hap- 
**  piness."e 

In  view  of  such  remarks,  let  us  read  a  few  passages  of 
scripture^    "There  shall  the  /re  devour  thee,-  the  sword 

a  Rev.  xxii.  1. 

b  Dialogue  Stli. 

c  Mai.  iii.  2.  3.    Minutes  p.  103.  Ballou  on  Atonement,  p.  155. 

d  1  Cor.  iii.  15.  compare  ray  third  Universalist  argument. 

e  Ob  Atonement,  pp.  154.  219.  220. 


248 

•'  shall  cut  thee  off;  it  shall  eat  thee  up  like  the  canker-worm." 
"  A  fire  devoureth  before  tliem,  and  behind  them  a  flame 
•*  burneth."  "  The  same  shall  drink  of  the  wine  of  th» 
"  wrath  of  God,  which  is  poured  out  without  mixture,  into 
<*  the  cup  of  his  indignation ;  and  he  shall  be  tormented 
•'  with^re  and  brimstone,  in  the  prcflsence  of  the  holy  angels, 
"  and  in  the  presence  of  the  Lamb.*'*  Now,  according  to 
Mr.  Ballou  and  my  opponent,  these  texts  should  be  consid- 
ered promises  instead  of  threats ;  promises  that  God  would 
purify  sinners  through  love.  Is  the  sword  an  instrument  of 
purification,  or  of  destruction  ?  Is  the  canker-worm  an  in- 
strument of  purification,  or  of  corruption  ?  This  devour- 
ing fire, — this  burning  flame, — this  tormenting  fire  and 
brimstone,  are  so  far  from  being  sent  in  love,  that  they  are 
said,  in  the  last  passage  quoted,  to  proceed  from  unmingled 
wrath.  It  is  elsewhere  spoken  of,  in  language  which  should 
not  be  thought  equivocal.  •'  Tlie  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  re- 
*<vealed  from  lleaven,  with  his  mighty  angels,  in  flaming 
"fire,  taking  vengeance  on  them  that  know  not  God,  and  that 
"  obey  not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  "  Afire  is 
"kindled  in  mine  a«5fer,  which  shall  burn  upon  you.'*  '*A 
'•'fire  is  kindled  in  mine  an^er,  and  shall  burn  unto  the  lowest 
"  helU^  "  Ye  have  kindled  a  fire  in  mine  anger,  which 
"shall  burn  forever.''''  •*  The  sinners  in  Zion  are  afraid  ; 
"  fearfulness  hath  surprised  the  hypocrites.  Who  among 
"  us  shall  dwell  with  the  devouring  fire  ?  Who  among  us 
"  shall  dwell  with  everlasting  burmng'7*^  "  Depart  from 
*'  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire.'*  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrah "  are  set  forth  for  an  example,  suffering  the  ven- 
*^  geance  of  eternal  fire.^'h 

But  my  opponent  congratulates  himself  upon  having  a 
happy  method  of  eluding  the  force  ol  these  texts,  by  saying- 
that  there  is  a  difference  between  goino^  to  everlasting  burn- 
ings, and  being  burned  everlastingly.  This  quibble  is  as  well 
presented  by  Mr.  Murray  as  by  any  Universalist  with  whom 
I  am  acquainted.  Conceroino-  the  cities  of  the  plain,  he 
sa^s,  "  These  people  were  set  forth  as  an  example,  suffering 
'*  the  vengeance  of  eternal  fire.  But  they  were  not  set  forth  as 
an  example  eternally  suffering  the  vengeance  of  fire."  *'  They 
may  suffer  the  vengeance  of  eternal  fire,  if  they  suffer  but 


1  Nah.  iii.  15.    Joel  ii.  3.    Rev.  xiv.  10. 

b  2  ThcB.  i.  7.  8.    Jer.  xv.  14.    Dut.  xxxii.  22.  Jer.  xvii.  4.    Is.  xxxiii.  14. 
MaU.  XXV.  41.     Jude  vii. 


249 

a  moment!!!"'  While  speaking  in  this  way,  it  is  possible  that 
these  gentlemen  tbrgot  thai  they  are  in  the  habit  of  giving  the 
very  opposite  interpretation,  to  precisely  the  same  form  olex- 
pression,  when  it  n)ay  be  perverted  to  their  own  purpose. 
They  are  both  in  the  habit  of  quoting  such  texts  as  speak  of 
the  everlasting  iove  of  God,  and  the  ever  tasting  joy  of  the 
saints,''  to  prove  that  God  will  love  then),  and  they  shall  enjoy 
him,  to  an  absolute  eternity.  Why  did  they  not  tell  us  in  their 
unenviable  ingenuity,  that  there  is  an  essential  difference  be- 
tween the  fruition  (*{  everlasting  joy,  and  the  everlasting  fru- 
ition of  joy  i  Why  did  they  they  n(»t  assure  us,  with  a  detes- 
table disingenuousness,  that  they  might  enjoy  everlasting  love^ 
if  they  enjoyed  it  but  a  moment?  Does  it  need  great  perspi- 
cacity to  see  that  if  God's  promise  oi' everlasting  love  and  ever- 
lasting joy  to  the  saints,  will  secure  their  eternal  salvation; 
then  his  threat  of  everlasting  Jire  and  everlasting  burnings 
to  the  wicked,  shall  ensure  their  eternal  punishment? 

But  my  opp(/nent  has  alreaoy  let  you  know  that  his  quiv- 
er is  nut  exhausted.  If  this  hre  must  be  £fbsolutely  eternal, 
he  thinks  himself  prepared  to  shew  that  God  himself  is  this 
eternal  fire;  and  that  it  is  therefore  a  happy  thing  to  be  cast 
into  it.  *'  For  our  God  is  a  consuming  fire."*  I'his  argument 
is  of  a  piece  with  that  which  re,)resentsthis  fire  as  a  puritying 
flame  :  for  those  who  uige  it,  say  that  God  consumes  their 
sins,  and  saves  their  souls.  That  God  does,  in  love  purify 
his  people  in  the  furnace  of  affliction,  is  a  glorious  and  con- 
solatory truth  :  but  the  context  of  every  passage  in  which 
God  is  called  a  consuming  Jue,  will  shew  that  he  consumes 
men,  and  not  sins ;  his  enemies,  and  not  his  friends^  and 
that  he  is  moved  to  do  this,  by  just  indignation,  and  not  by 
paternal  affection.  This  is  the  sense  of  that  passage  to  which 
the  Apostle  alluded,  in  the  text  just  now  quoted,  "  For  the 
Loid  thy  God  is  a  consuming  fire,  even  a  jealous  God."^  To 
shew  that  this  jealousy  is  the  zeal  of  a  judge  determined  to 
punish  sinners,  and  not  that  of  a  father  who  would  purge 
away  sins,  Moses  says  soon  afterward,  "Understand  tbere- 
"  fore  this  day,  that  the  Lord  thy  God  is  he  which  goeth 
*'  over  before  thee  ;  as  a  consuming  fire  be  shall  destroy  them, 
"and  be  shall  bring  them  down  before  thy  face:  so  shalt 
"  thou  drive  them  out,  and  destroy  them  quickly,  as  the  Lord 
"  hath  said  unto  thee."e 

a  Murray's  Universalism  vindicated,  pp.  54,  55. 

b  Jer.  xxxi.  3.     Is.  Ixi.  7.      Minutes  p.  141. 

c  Hebr.  xii.  29.  d  Deut.  iv.  24.  e  Deut,  ix.  3- 

Hh 


250 

But  if  tliil  fire  is  God,  then  the  Gehenna  of  jire».  must 
mean  the  dwelling  of  God.  It  hecouies  necessary  therefore, 
to  adopt  a  scheme  of  interpretation,  which  neither  ol'  us  has 
hitherto  recognized  ;  and  make  Gehenna  to  signify,  neither 
earth  nor  hell,  l)ut  heaven.  If  this  be  true,  M  .  Ballon  may 
well  claim  all  my  authorities,  in  which  this  Gehenna  is  found 
as  "  direct  evidences"  in  favour  of  his  system  instead  of 
mine.  Shall  I  undertake  to  expose  to  \ou,  my  beloved  hear- 
ers, the  abominable  folly  and  wickedness  of  this  perversion 
of  the  sacred  oracles?  Instead  of  saying  with  the  \pn.stle 
James,  that  the  tongue  which  is  full  of  deadly  poison,  ''is 
set  on  fire  ot  hell,*'  this  scheme  of  niterpretation  would  rep- 
resent it  as  set  on  the  God  of  heaven.  According  to  this, 
whosoever  shall  say  thou  tool,  shall  be  in  danger  of  the  dwel- 
ling of  God,  ins'ead  of  the  Gehenna  of  fire.  According  to 
this  system,  it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  into  life  with  one 
eye,  rather  than  having  two  e\e^,  to  be  cast  into  the  dwelling 
of  God.  This  plan  would  make  it  impossible  for  those  whom 
eur  Saviour  called  serpents  and  vipers,  to  escape  from  going* 
to  heaven.  But  if  such  gross  absurdity  be  far  benea  h  the 
dignity  of  common  sense,  how  infiinitely  is  it  beneath  the  wis- 
dom of  him  who  spake  as  man  never  spake!  That  my  op- 
ponent should  turn  his  back  upon  his  own  argument,  is  na- 
tural enough.  1  am  only  sorry  that  his  chagrin  should  make 
him  deny  that  he  ever  used  it.b 

(2.)  Destruction.  In  two  of  the  passages  where  Gehenna 
occurs,  it  is  insinuated,  that  in  certain  cases,  if  a  man  per- 
mit not  a  member  to  perish  or  be  destroyed'^  on  earth,  his 
whole  b'Kly  shall  be  destroyed  in  Gehenna.  In  another  pas- 
sage weai'etold  to  fear  him  who  is  able  todestioy^hoi\\  soul 
and  body  in  Gehenna.  The  same  Greek  verb  occurs  in  all 
those  passages,  and  is  correctly  rendered  perish  in  one 
place,  and  dealroy  in  another,  because  it  is  in  different  voi- 
ces The  same  verb  is  translated  lose  where  our  Saviour 
promises  to  '*  htse  nothing,"  that  in,  permit  nothing  tobedes- 
iroi/ed,*'  that  the  Father  had  given  him.  The  same  verb  is 
rendered  in  the  sanie  way,  and  its  conjugate  is  rendered  per- 
dition where  our  Saviour  says,  *'  none  ol  them  is  tost,  but 

a  yiSwa  <rou   tu^oS 

b  He  has  accordingly  as  fir  as  I  can  perceive,  left  it   out  of  those  famous  Mi* 
■utesof  the  Debate,  which  Mr  Jennings  lias  fathered  for  him. 
«   atroXrjTai       ^^^latt.  v.  29.  SO. 
d   a*oXetfa/.      Matt.  x.  28. 
*'  ewraXsrfw.     John  vi.  39. 


25L 

the  son  of  perdition,  or  destruction.*'''  This  noun  is  else- 
where ti'ansliited  perdUion,  when  immediately  connected 
with  another  word  which  is  rendered  destruction^* 

The  texts  just  now  referred  to,  prove  thatthe  sonls  and  bo- 
dies of  traitors  and  rich  urd)elievei's  are  destroyed  in  Gehen- 
«a,  after  death.     To  deny  the  eternity  of  this  destruction,  or 
to  confine  it  to  inen^s  sins  instead  of  their  persons,   will  be 
found  not  only  inconsistent  with  scripture,  but  with  former 
concessions  of  the  Universal ists  themselves.     This  word  oc- 
curs in  one  of  their  favourite  texts;  in  which  it  is  said  that 
God  is  "  not  willing  that   any  should  jo^W«/<,«  but  that  all 
should  come  to  repe!itance."^     Now  suppose  that  this  perish- 
iny  is  not  eternal,  but  tempcu'al.     Then  the  text  would  read, 
that  God  is  not  willing  that  any  should  sutfer  a  temporal 
judgment!  But  again  ;  suppose  that  it  relates  to  the  des- 
truction of  men's  sins,  instead  of  their  persons.     Then  the 
text  would  mean,  that  God"  is  not  willing  that  any  person's  . 
sins   should   be  destroyed]  In  this  place  the   word  perish, 
must  relate  to  the  eternal,  punishment  of  men's  persons,  or 
the  passage  would   make  perfect  non-sense,  and  contradict 
the  Universalists   as  well  as   the  Orthodox.     That  it  is  a 
dreadful  torment,  yet  to  come  in  its  greatest  intensity,  upon 
devils  and  men,  is  plainly  indicated  in  scripture.     Devils 
said  to  Jesus,  "  Art  thou  come  to  destroif  us  V    "  Art  thou 
come  hither  to  torment  us  before  the  time  ?  'f    That  it  is 
the  very  opposite  of  eternal   salvation,  James  intimates,  in 
sayino-  "  There  is  one  Lawgiver,  who  is  able  to  save  and  to 
destroi/.'^S     Paul  also,  repeatedly  contrasts  the  two.     He 
speaks  of  Satan  and  the  Pope,  as  working  "  with  all  deceiv- 
"  ableness  of  unrighteousness,  in  them  that  perw/t ;  ^^  because 
*'they  received  not  the  love  of  the  truth,  that  they  might  be 
"  saved.*'     "  For  we  are  unto  God,  a  sweet  savour  of  Christ, 
"  in  them  that  are  saved  and   in  them  that  perish.*''     To 
shew  that  our  Saviour  meant  that  this  is  an  eternal  aesf ruc- 
tion, he  repeatedly  contrasts  it  with  eternal  life.  "  And  I  give 

a   ou^Si^  £|  auTwv  aTuXfro,  £i  (J-v  o  mS  Tr,g  acwXeiaS.    J"h"  "vii.  12. 

b  1  Tim.  VI.  9.  •* 

c   aWoXstfflKi 

d  2  Pet.  iii.  9. 

e  aTfoXsrfai. 

f  Luke  iv.  34.    Matt.  viii.  29. 

gjas.  iv.  12. 

h  aTToXXufASvoig. 

ia*cXX.f.Jvo.f.      2Thess.  ii.lO.    2Cor.ii.i:.. 


252 

"  unto  them  eternal  life^  and  tliey  shall  never  perish^'  "  And 
"  as  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  in  the  wilderness,  even  so 
"  must  the  Son  of  Man  be  lifted  up,  that  whosoever  belie- 
"  veth  on  him  should  not  perish^  but  have  eternai  life.  For 
"  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  j^ave  his  only  begoiteii 
"  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  r\oiperish^  but 
*'  have  everlustimf  lije.'\  In  these  tN^o  last  passages,  as  in 
2  Peter  iii.  9.b  both  parties  are  agreed  that  an  eternal  des- 
truction is  meant. 

As  this  point  is  established,  hy  the  contrast  which  is 
made,  between  this  destruction  or  perdition,  on  the  one  hand 
and  eternal  life  and  salvation,  on  the  other,  so  is  it  confiim- 
ed  by  the  connexion  which  is  found  between  this  perdition^ 
and  an  important  word  of  the  same  meaning  "•  But  they 
*•  that  will  be  rich,  fall  into  temptations  and  a  snare,  and  in- 
'*to  many  foolish  and  hurtful  lusts,  which  drown  men  in  des- 
"  truction  and  perdition.'"^  Now,  that  some  do  wish  to  be 
rich,  is  undeniable  ;  and  it  is  equally  inconti'overtible,  that 
they  fall  into  temptations  and  a  snare ;  and  that  they  live 
and  die,  in  the  indulgence  of  many  foolish  and  hurtful  lusts. 
Then  this  prophetic  threat  makes  it  as  certain  that  they 
shall  be  drowned  in  the  lake  o^ perdition,  as  the  Mosaic  his- 
tory makes  it  certain,  that  the  Egyptians  were  drowned  in 
the  Red  Sea.  In  the  text  this  perdition  is  synonymous  with 
destruction.  If  therefore,  destruction  be  everlasting,  so  is 
perdition.  But  Paul  says,  in  another  place,  that  the  re- 
jecters of  the  gospel  *'  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting 
destruction.** d  This  proof  of  the  eternity  of  destruction, 
establishes  the  eternity  of  that  peraition,  which  is  synony- 
mous with  it.  It  also  shews,  that  when  the  son  of  perdition 
went  to  his  own  place,  he  went  to  that  Gehenna,  which  is 
the  place  of  eternal  perdition;  in  which  God  can  and  will 
destroy  the  souls  and  bodies  of  gospel  despisers,  after  death 
and  the  general  judgment. 

But  Mr.  Murray  would  tell  us  not  to  be  too  hasty  with 
this  conclusion  ;  for  he  has  another  of  his  weighty  senten-^ 
ces  to  give  us,  on  tiiis  subject,  viz.  "  There  is  an  immense 
"difference  between  being  punished  with  everlasting  des- 
*'  truction,  and  being  everlastingly  punished  with  destruc- 

a  Johnx.  28.  iii.  15,  16. 
b  See  my  7tli  Universalist  Argument. 
c  oXeo^ov  xai  affcjXEiav      1  Tim.  vi.  9, 
^   oXfBfov   ttiwviov      2  Thes.  i.  9. 


253 

**  tion.'**  I  quoted  sn-ipturc  just  now,  which  shews  that  this 
destruction  is  repeatedly  and  expressly  contrasted  with  ever- 
lastiny  li/e.  Did  Mr.  Murray,  or  my  opponent,  or  any  other 
Universalist,  ever  tell  us  that  there  is  an  immense  difference 
between  liaving  eternal  lite,  and  eternally  havin]^  life? 
They  all  (|uotc  tliese  authorities  for  the  ()})posite  purpose. 
While  they  deny  that  a  denunciation  of  everlasting  destruc- 
tion, destroys  the  sinner  eternally,  they  all  declare  that 
these  pioinises  of  eternal  life,  will  eternally  save  those  to 
whom  they  are  made.  Satanic  subtlety,  when  exposed,  has 
sometimes  the  appearance  of  idiotic  imbecility.  This  argu- 
ment was  intended  as  a  sj)ecimen  of  ingenuity  :  but  it  may 
well  serve  as  an  example  of  fatuity. 

(•i.)  Damnation.  On  a  certain  occasion  our  Saviour  ad-, 
dressed  his  hearers  in  the  following  awful  language.  **  Ye 
"  serpents,  ye  generation  of  vipers !  how  can  ye  escape  the 
**  damnation  of  Gehenna  ?"b  It  is  admitted  that  this  word 
signifies  condemnation,  or  adjudication  to  punishment.  The 
passage  would  then  read,  how  can  ye  escape  hein^  condemn- 
edf  or  adjudged  to  the  punishment  of  Gehenna  ?  This  is  the 
word  which  is  used  to  distinguish  the  day  of  final  account  • 
in  which  angels  and  men  shall  be  sentenced  to  eternal  hap- 
piness or  eternal  niisery.  "  Herein  is  our  love  made  per- 
fect that  we  may  have  boldness  in  the  day  of  jadcfmentPc, 
This  boldness  of  God's  believing  people  arises  from  a  con- 
viction that  Jesus  Christ,  their  divine  and  law-satisfying 
Surety,  has  borne  their  condemnation  and  punishment,  and 
clothed  them  with  his  perfect  lighteousness  In  the  day  of 
judgment,  they  know  that  they  shall  be  justified  through 
God's  covenant  mercy.  If  all  men  universally,  were  to 
sliew  mercy  here,  and  receive  mercy  in  the  day  of  judgment, 
none  w<mld  be  damned.  But  concerning  that  man  who  has 
shewn  no  mercy  the  Apostle  says,  *  he  shall  have  judgment 
or  damnation  without  mercy :"  and  coticerning  those  who 
have  an  interest  in  Christ,  who  was  made  a  curse  for  them, 
he  says,*'  mercy  rejoiceth  Signmatj udg?nent  nv damnation  "<* 
Although  in  this  world,  this  judymetif  or  da  inalion  is  often 
the  drunkard's  song,  and  is  often  made  so,  by  the  profane 
taunts  of  Universalists  and  Atheists,  the  Holy  Spirit  assures 

a  Universalism  Vindicated,  p.  54. 
^  T19S  x^Kttus  7r]S  yasvvrjg        Matt  2S.  33. 
0  ev  Tt)  r/iis^a  T*)g  x^Ktsui,      1  In.  4}  17. 
d  Jas.  2j  19.    Comp.  tial.  3;  13. 


254 

us,  that  with  rej^ard  to  some,  it  is  fearful  in  anticipation, 
even  here,  and  that  hereafter,  it  is  followed  by  that  fiery 
torment,  of  \^hi(  h  Judas  and  tl»e  rich  man  have  ah-eady  a 
foietaste,  and  which  awaits  all  God's  adversaries.  Tlie  un- 
pardonable offender  is  said  to  have  "  a  certain  fearful  look- 
"  ing  for,  of  judgment,  ov  damn<itioni»  and  fiery  indignation, 
*'  which  shall  devour  the  adversaries.'' 

Whi-n  my  opponent  insists  that  we  must  not  look  forward 
so  far  for  this  condemnation,  but  that  it  takes  place  in  this 
life;  I  admit,  that  before  man  sinned,  angels  were  condemn- 
ed ;  and  since  that  event,  he  that  believeth  not  is  condemned 
already.  But  if  this  condemnation  be  confined  to  this  life, 
and  reach  not  beyond  the  grave,  why  does  the  Apostle  say, 
'*  it  is  appointed  unto  men,  once  to  die,  but  after  this  the 
judgment  ^'"^  Our  Saviour  assures  us,  that  after  men  are 
dead  and  buried,  ''  all  that  are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his 
"  voice,  and  shall  come  forth  ;  they  that  have  done  good,  unto 
"  the  resurrection  of  life;  and  they  that  have  done  evil  unto 
"the  resurrection  of  damnalion.**^  Although  fallen  angels 
are  already  condemned  or  bound  overto  punishment, there  is 
yet  a  great  day  of  accounts  before  them,  which  shall  be  so 
far  from  relaxing  their  bonds,  that  the  chains,  by  which  they 
are  reserved  for  that  dreadful  reckoning,  are  expressly  de- 
clared to  be  everlasting.  ''  And  the  Angels  whicii  kept  not 
*'  their  first  estate,  but  left  their  own  habitation,  lie  hath  rc- 
"  served  in  everlasting  chains,  under  darkness,  unto  the 
"judgment  of  the  great  day.'"^  That  these  everlasting 
chains  bind  overto  everlasting  punishment,  is  plain  from  the 
declaration  of  our  Saviour,  tliat  "  he  that  shall  blaspheme 
"  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  hath  never  forgiveness,  but  is  in 
*'  danger  of,  deserving  of,  bound  over  to,  eternal  damnatiuti.*^^ 

The  amount  of  the  evidence,  under  this  word  Getienna,  is, 
that  this  is  a  place  of  punishment  for  the  soul,  after  death, 
and  for  the  soul  and  body,  after  the  general  judgment ;  that 
it  is  a  state  in  which  the  impenitent  and  unbelieving  ai-e 
tormented  in  unquenchable  jire,  with  everlasting  destruction^ 
under  eternal  damnation.  May  God,  for  Christ's  sake,  pre- 
serve you  from  a  presumptuous  defiance  of  such  a  fate. 


b  x^i^(f.    n\'br.  ix.  27. 

c  «vagaO'(V  XiPirfews.   I"-  ■*'•  28, 29. 

*■  ;V05f(/S  E?iv  aiwviou   xpt(isu)C,      ^Ik.  iii.  29, 


255 

4. 
TARTARUS. 

The  word  Tartarus  is  not  literallij  used  once,  in  om*  com- 
mon Greek  Scriptures,  from  Genesis  to  Revelation.  Yet 
both  parties  admit  that  it  is  cirtuall:/  used  there,  as  one  ofits 
participial  conjugates  is  found,  amcine;  the  Wag  Xs70|ui-sva(\vords 
once  sj)oken)  of  the  New  Testament.  The  word  is  tarta- 
rosas  from  the  verb  tartaronii.  This  is  literally  rendered 
by  the  French  abimer,  and  the  Italian  abissare;  which  last 
word  is  used  for  this  purpose,  in  the  Italian  New  Testament, 
circulated  by  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society.  The 
Popish  and  Protestant  French  New  I'estaments,  published  by 
the  same  Society,  have  rendered  it,  c<»rrectly  enough,  by  a 
circumlocution;  although  that  language  affords  a  verb  ex- 
actly corresponding  with  the  original.  What  they  did  from 
choice,  we  have  done  fj'om  necessity.  In  this  we  follow  the 
Latin  of  the  Vulgate  and  Beza,  the  German  of  Luther,  and 
many  other  examples.  Instead  of  manufacturing  a  new  verb 
for  the  occasion,  our  Hebrew  New  Testament,  now  in  use, 
renders  it,  "cast  them  down  to  Sheot;^^  and  even  the  modern 
Greek,  which  we  shouhl  su})pose,  was  not  deficient  in  tiiis 
respect,  renders  it,  "^  cast  them  into  Tartarus.^''-^  In  the 
Classical  Greek  wi-iters,  the  verb  and  the  ciirumiocution  are 
us  d  interchaugeably.  Concerning  the  same  persons,  Apol- 
lodorus  says,  in  one  breath,  that  they  nve  "■  iiitartaratec/,'* 
and  in  the  next,  tliatthey  •jLve'-'cast  into  tartarus.'^h 

That  the  Gi-eeks  and  the  R)mans  considered  this  a  place 
of  punishment  for  the  wicked  after  death,  need  not  be  elabo- 
rately proved.  Evidences  of  this  are  found  in  all  the  books. 
ti  Virgil,  in  his  sixth  /Eneid,  whei-e  he  probably  has  a  parti- 
cular refei'enceto  therepiesentations  made  of  a  future  state 
in  the  mysteries,  as  well  as  to  those  made  by  Homer,  repre- 
sents several  soi'ts  of  per-sons,  who  had  been  guilty  of  yerj 
heinous  crimes,  as  adjudged  to  gi-ievous  punishments  in  Tar- 
tarus. Vers  565,  ets^eq."  Among  the  Greeks,  the  testimo- 
ny of  Plato  deserves  notice.  ''  In  the  conclusion  of  his 
Phsedo,  he  introduces  Socrates,  in  one  of  his  most  serious 
and  solemn  discourses  just  before  his  death,  talking  after  the 
manner  of  the  Poets,  of  the  judges  after  death,  of  Cartarus^ 
Acheron,  the  Acherusian  lake,  Pyriphlegetlion,  and  Cocy- 

a  TO'JS  £/3aX£v  ug  tov  Taprapov. 

b  xaTaTapTapw55vTas=p»(p5SV'Ta5  SM  -Taprapov.    See  Parkhurst 


266 

tus  :  that  some,  after  having  gone  through  various  punish- 
ments, shall  be  purged  and  absolved,  and  after  certain  peri- 
ods, shall  be  freed  from  their  punisliments:  *  But  those  who 

*  by  reason  of  the  greatness  of  their  sins,  seem  to  be  incura- 

*  ble,  who  have  committed  many  and  great  sacrileges,  or  un- 
*just  and  unlawful  murders,  and  other  crimes  oftlielike  na- 
*ture,  shall  have  a  fate  suitable  to  them,  being  thrown  down 
*into  Tartarus^  from  whence  they  never  shall  escape.*  The 
like  representation  is  made  at  the  latter  end  of  Plato's  tenth 
Republic,  in  the  story  of  Erus  Armenius.  In  his  Goigias 
also  he  supposes  the  wicked,  and  those  wbo  were  incurable, 
to  be  sent  to  Tartarus,  wbere  they  shall  be  punished  with 
endless  torments,  as  an  example  to  others :  and  he  approves 
of  Homer,  for  representing  w  icked  kings  who  had  tyrannized 
over  mankind,  among  tbose  who  shall  be  so  punislied."^^ 

That  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  adopted  many 
words  from  the  Greeks,  in  w  hose  language  they  wrote,  is  as 
easily  accounted  for,  as  it  is  willingly  admitted  :  but  that 
the  doctrines  connected  with  these  words  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, either  originated  with  the  Heathen,  or  are  entirely 
conformable  to  their  views  of  religion  and  philosophy,  is 
denied.  There  is  a  degree  of  similarity  between  Plato's  ac- 
count of  lartan/s,  as  given  above,  and  the  Sci'iptuial  ac- 
count of  the  same  place  :  so  there  is  some  resemblance  be- 
tween the  Inspired  and  the  Platonic  description  of  Hades. 
Both  contrast  it  with  heaven,  and  both  represent  it  as  a  place 
of  future  punishment.  The  latter  is  done  by  the  Philoso- 
pher in  the  following  words,  viz.  "They  that  have  sinned 
*'  more  frequently  and  more  heinously,  sliall  fall  into  the 
**  depth,  and  into  those  lower  places,  which  are  called 
**■  Hades.""  Again  he  says  to  the  transgressor,  '*  Thou  shalt 
"  suffer  a  suitable  punishment,  either  whilst  thou  remainest 
**  here,  or  when  thou  goest  to  Hades.^''^  That  the  author  of 
these  declarations,  differed  from  the  Scriptures,  in  his  views 
of  a  future  retribution,  is  evident  from  the  falsehood  and 
folly  which  he  has  mixed  with  his  assertions.  The  Philo- 
sophers also  differ  from  the  scriptures,  in  the  account  which 
they  give  of  the  origin  of  this  doctrine.  The  Scriptures 
never  once  insinuate  as  they  do,  that  it  was  borrowed  from 
uninspired  human  tradition.  It  is  true,  the  Universalists  as- 
sert this  for  them  :  but  the   inspired  writers  uniformly  de- 

c  Leland's  Advantage  and  Necessity  of  the  Chi'istian  Revelation,  vol.  2,  pp. 
267.265.    Finley's  edition,  Philadelphia. 

•1  Leland,  vol.  2.  pp.  818.  319. 


257 

liver  it,  upon  the  same  authority  with  all  their  other  instrucr 
tions  :  they  give  it  as  the  word  of  God,  and  not  of  man.  But 
when  riato  tells  us  of  the  punishment  of  sin  being  required 
by  the  Justice  of  God,  hi?  says  expressly,  that  this  is  "  as 
ancient  tradition  teacheth."e  Doubtless,  this  tradition  was 
as  ancient  as  the  word  Sheol,  or  the  language  to  which  it 
belongs :  but  although  the  heathen  world  received  it  from 
the  polluted  streams  of  tradition,  the  church  received  it,  first 
and  last,  from  the  pure  fountain  of  revelation. 

As  the  Church  of  Clirist,  whether  inspired  or  uninspir- 
ed, knows  that  this  do(;trine  came  from  the  source  of  truth, 
they  have  always  treated  it  as  a  solemn  and  eternal  truth; 
How  different  the  treatment  which  it  has  received  from  the 
Heathen  and  Heretical  world  !  Plutarch  in  speaking  of  the 
Epicurean  philosophy,  says  that  tlie  generality  of  the  hea- 
then were  ready  to  admit  what  he  calls  ''  the  fabulous  hope 
of  immortality,  but  that  they  had  no  fear  of  the  punishments 
said  to  be  in  Hades."^  Thus  they  used  the  words  Hades  and 
Tartarus,  to  denote  a  state  of  punishment  hereafter,  while 
in  reality,  the  doctrine  of  future  retribution  was,  with  them, 
an  object  of  derision.  That  Mr.  Balfour  was,  in  some  mea- 
sure, aware  of  this,  will  appear  from  the  following  extract, 
viz.  *•  Though  punishment  after  death  in  Tartarus  w  as  be- 
**  lieved  by  the  heathen  generally,  yet  the  better  iiifoi-med 
**  among  them  did  not  believe  'in  the  fables  of  hell,'  butturu.- 
'*ed  them  into  ridicule.  Juvenal  took  no  part  iii  those 
"  opinions  of  the  vulgar ;  and  Virgil  says,  '  it  was  the  pro- 
**  vince  of  philosophy  alone  to  shake  off  the  yoke  of  custom, 
*'  rivetted  by  education.'  Is  it  not  then  strange,  that  a  doc- 
^*  trine,  which  was  indented  by  heathens,  and  treated  with 
"  contempt  by  their  own  wisest  men,  should  be  a  fundamen- 
'*  tal  article  in  the  faith  of  christians  ?".? 

That  this  doctrine  was  invented  by  the  heathen,  is  itself 
a  late  invention :  since  the  ancient  heathen  writers  testify 
that  it  was  not  formed  by  inveiition,  but  received  by  tradi- 
tion, from  a  still  more  remote,  and  to  them,  inscrutable  anti- 
quity. That  their  would-be  wise-men  rejected  the  doctrine, 
is  admitted.  To  the  names  of  Virgil  and  Juvenal  among 
the  Romans,  might  be  added  those  of  their  poets,  orators, 
historians,  and  philosophers  in  general,  with  tlie  great  Sen- 
eca and  Cicero  at  their  head.     To  the  name  of  Plutarch,  tli€; 

e  Leiand,  toI-  2,  p.  364. 
fl-eland,  vol.  2,  p.  391. 
%  Cha[».  1 ,  sect.  5. 

Il 


258 

latest  of  the  Greek  philosophers,  may  be  added,  (strange  ay 
it  may  seem,)  the  more  ancient  and  eminent  Plato  and  So- 
crates, Epictetus,  Aristotle,  and  Pythagoras,  neither  of 
whom  Avas  a  real  believer  in  future  punishment.  With 
these,  the  body  of  the  pliilosophical  sects,  of  Epicureans  and 
Peripatetics,  Cynics,  Cyrenaics,  and  Stoics,  generally 
agreed.  Mr.  Balfour  intimates  that  this  rejection  of  future 
punishment  was  among  the  wise  men,  while  the  people  gen- 
erally held  our  doctrine  It  is  the  opinion  of  many  that  on 
this  subject,  these  Philosophers  maintained  an  esoteric  and 
an  exoteric  doctrine ;  the  two  opposite  systems  of  Universal- 
ism  and  Orthodoxy^  the  one  for  the  wise  men,  and  the  other  for 
the  vulgar;  a  system  of  policy  which  Mr.  Balfour  attributes 
to  Dr.  George  Campbell.  If  this  be  true,  then,  according 
to  his  scale  of  morality,  they  must  not  only  have  been  wise 
men^  but  *»  the  very  best  of  men.'*''  They  taught  a  doctrine 
publicly,  which  they  inwardly  despised,  and  privately  ridi- 
culed. Mr.  Balfour  is  heartily  welcome  to  the  suffrages  of 
all  such  wise  men  as  these,  whether  ancient  or  modern.  I 
would  not  exchange  the  testimony  of  one  poor  heaven-taught 
martyr,  w  ithout  a  name  ;  for  that  of  a  regiment  of  blinded 
philosophers,  without  a  conscience. 

Any  enlightened  Christian,  who  considers  tlie  gulph  of 
moral  degradation,  into  which  sin  had  plunged  these  Unita- 
rian wise-men,  will  not  wonder  that  they  resorted  to  the 
soothing  fables  of  Universalism  or  Atheism,  to  relieve  their 
fears.  While  tliey  were  willing  to  restrain  the  vulgar  with 
the  fear  of  God's  punitive  justice,  they  were  obliged,  like 
modern  Universalists,  to  avert  their  own  guilty  faces  from 
his  indignant  frown.  Neither  the  heathen  nor  the  heretical 
world  can  endure  the  doctrine  of  God's  anger  against  sin. 
Altliougli  Cicero  approves  of  paying  some  regard  to  an  oath, 
he  says  tliat  this  should  not  be  done  "  out  of  the  fear  of  the 
anger  of  the  Gods,  for  there  is  no  such  thing."  He  declares  that 
'*  God  is  never  angry,  nor  iiurteth  any  one:"  and  concern- 
ing this  doctrine,  he  positively  asserts,  that  ^'  it  is  api'inci- 
ple  universally  held  by  all  tiie  Philosophers."  Concerning 
the  Gods,  Seneca  declares,  *•  they  neither  will,  nor  can  hurt 
anyone."  As  the  sufferings  of  every  day,  under  God's  pro- 
vidence, contradict  ti»is  empty  assertion,  my  opponent  will 
admit  that  God  can  and  w  ill  hurt  some,  though  it  will  be  in 
this  world  only.  For  this  he  has  pointed  to  the  house  of  tlie 
foolish  woman  :  and  has  assured  us  that  in  the  haunts  of  re- 
velry and  debauchery,  we  will  fitid  hell  with  its  ten-fold 


259 

horrors.  Now  it  is  a  fact,  no  less  notorious  than  mournful, 
that  the  children  of  this  world,  can  conceive  of  no  better 
heaven,  than  these  sensual  enjoyments.  Notwithstanding 
the  halo  of  purity,  with  which  the  corrupt  and  ignorant  have 
graced  the  head  of  Plato,  this  universalist  wise-man  was  him- 
self addicted  to  such  vices  ;  and  in  his  fifth  Republic,  he  re- 
presents tlie  enjoyment  of  such  impure  pleasures  beyond 
the  grave,  as  constituting  the  chief  feature  of  the  brave  sol- 
dier's heaven.  That  this  is  the  doctrine  of  Mahomet  and 
his  millions  of  followers  is  well  known  to  you  all.  I  need 
hardly  add,  that  those  Unitarians  and  Universalists,  who 
have  made  overtures  of  confraternity,  to  tlie  successors  of  the 
Arabian  impostor,  shew  by  their  profession  and  practice, 
that  this  is  the  heaven  which  they  desire.  How  could  it  be 
otherwise?  They  have  rejected  spiritual  happiness,  and  no- 
thing remains  but  a  carnal  paradise.  After  having  despis- 
ed the  Trinity,  could  they  be  happy,  where  a  Trinity  pre- 
sides ?  After  having  abhorred  the  atonement,  could  they 
dwell  with  those  who  are  washed  in  the  Saviour's  blood  ? 
and  could  they  relish  the  heavenly  influences  of  that  Divine 
Spirit,  whose  Deity  and  operations  they  had  denied  and 
rejected  here  ?  They  have  forsaken  the  fountain  of 
living  waters,  and  it  is  natural  for  them  to  hew  out  to 
themselves,  cisterns,  broken  cisterns,  which  can  hold  no  wa- 
ter. If,  therefore,  sensual  pleasures,  in  which  they  delight, 
be  the  only  hell  which  is  threatened  them,  what  have  they  to 
deter  them  from  sin  t  Although  Mr.  Balfour  has  failed  to 
prove  that  future  punishment  was  invented  by  tlie  heathen, 
it  is  a  fact  that  this  temporal  hell  of  my  opponent,  is  an  in- 
vention of  heathenish  corruption  and  infatuation.  While 
Plutarch  represents  the  fear  of  future  punishment,  as  a 
"  childish  fear,"  and  represents  the  doctrine  which  we  hold, 
as  made  up  of  "  fabulous  stories,  and  the  tales  of  mothers 
and  nurses,'*  he  says,  "  I  am  of  opinion,  if  it  be  lawful  to 
say  so,  that  wicked  men  need  neither  the  Gods  nor  men  to 
punish  them:  but  their  own  life,  being  wholly  corrupted, and 
full  of  perturbation,  is  a  sufficient  punishment."** 

The  most  prominent  argument  of  these  wise  men  for  a  fu- 
ture immortality  in  any  condition,  was  perfectly  futile  and 
false,  and  accordingly,  they  generally  doubted  and  rejected 
the  doctrine  of  a  future  existence  altogether.  When  they  ap- 
peared to  advocate  it,  it  was  only  for  a  limited  period,  and  for 

h  Leland,  voL  2,  pp.  375,  3r6,  339,373. 


260 

the  benefit  of  the  learned  only ;  but  even  these  usually  joined 
in  denying  it  entirely.  Aristotle  says  that  "  death  is  the 
"  most  dreadful  of  all  thin.s:s :  for  that  it  is  the  end  [of  our 
*'  existence] :  and  that  to  him  that  is  dead,  there  seems  no- 
*'  thing  farther  to  remain,  whether  good  or  evil  '*  Cicero  in 
his  Tusculan  Disputations,  informs  us  that  the  doctrine  of 
the  immortality  of  the  soul  was  despised  by  the  whole  literaiy 
w  orld.  He  tells  us  that  it  was  not  only  contradicted  by  the 
Epicureans,  "but,"  says  he,  "1  know  n<>t  how  it  is,  that 
"  every  learned  man  treats  it  with  contempt."'  The  sentence 
quoted  some  time  ago  from  Plutarch,  in  which  he  speaks  of 
the  ^^  fabulous  hope  of  immortality,'^  shews,  that  long  aftey 
miany  of  the  vulgar  heathen  had  received  the  Christian  reli- 
gion, "the  better  informed  among  them,"  as  Mr.  Balfour 
styles  these  Philosophers,  continued  to  ridicule  what  these 
learned  blind  men  considered  the  fobks  of  hell^  and  the  fa- 
hies  of  heaven  too.  How  unenviable  is  that  pre-eminence, 
■which  consists  in  the  gioss  abuse,  of  peculiar  talents  and  op- 
portunities of  improvement !  A\  hile  the  Universalists  admire 
them  for  their  errors,  and  give  them  the  praise  of  being  bet- 
ter infoimed  than  the  vulgar,  who  believed  in  future  rewards 
and  punishments,  the  Spirit  of  God  declares  that  they  '*  be- 
*'  came  vain  in  their  imaginations,  and  their  f(»olish  heart 
"  was  darkened.  Professing  themselves  to  be  wise,  they  be- 
*'  came  fools."  By  such  men  it  is  an  honour  to  be  condemned 
and  derided. 

While  claiming  these  heathen  wise  men  for  the  Univer- 
salists, Mr.  Balfour  tells  us  that  "punishment  after  death  in 
*'  Tartarus  was  believed  by  the  heathen  generally."  If  this 
be  true,  it  is  an  astonishing  fact.  Concerning  the  people  and 
their  instructors,  it  may  gei>erally  be  said,  "  like  priest,  like 
j)eople."  "  A  little  leaven  leaveneth  the  whole  lump."  Now 
although  these  favourites  of  Mr.  Balfour  and  the  Univer- 
Salits.  often  spoke  one  thing  and  thought  another ; — although 
it  is  a  notorious  fact,  that  they  openly  advocated  downright 
lying  ;  it  is  far  from  being  certain  that  the  body  of  the  peo- 
ple materially  differed  from  them.  Concerning  future  punish- 
ments, Plutarch  says,  "theie  are  not  many  that  fear  these 
things."  The  celebrated  disciple  of  Socrates  repeatedly  and 
variously  declares,  that  this  doctrine  of  future  punishment. 
'*  met  with  little  credit  among  men."  According  to  him,  the 
vulgar  among  the  Heathen,  were  a  sort  of  Atheistical  Mate- 

i  1^1.  2:  284.  285. 


261 

'rialists,  like  my  opponent.  Plato  says  that  *'most  me* 
"  seemed  to  think  that  the  soul  was  immediately  dissolved 
**  at  death,  and  that  it  vanished  and  was  dissipated,  like  the 
**  wind  or  smoke,  or  became  nothing  at  all :  and  that  it  need- 
'*  ed  no  small  persuasion  and  faith  to  believe  that  the  soul 
**  exists,  and  has  some  power  and  intelligence  after  the  man 
"  is  dead.'li 

The  inconsistencies  and  contradictions  found  in  the  writ- 
ings of  these  ancient  philosophers,  are  scarcely  more  palpa- 
ble than  those  which  are  found  in  their  modern  brethren. 
Mr.  Balfour  and  my  opponent,  at  one  moment,  boast  that 
these  wise  men  reject  our  fables  of  hell ;  and  at  the  next  mo- 
ment, accuse  us  of  borrowing  our  doctrine  of  eternal  punish- 
ment in  TartaniSf  from  the  false  philosophy  of  the  heathen. 
Their  accusations  are  as  groundless  as  their  boasting  is 
shameful.  The  New  Testament  uses  their  words  for  devil 
and  hell;  and  it  also  uses  their  words  for  God  and  Heaven: 
but  while  Paul  declares  to  them  the  true  nature  of  that  God 
whom  they  ignorantly  worshipped,  Peter  teaches  them  the 
true  character  of  that  Tartarus^  which  they  blindly  derided. 
The  Universalists  reject  the  doctrine  of  revelation,  and  boast 
that  these  false  philosophers  did  the  same !  And  who  are 
these  better  informed  among  the  heathen,  with  whom  it  is 
such  an  honour  to  agree  ?  They  were  the  blind  and  deaf,  al- 
ways speculating  about  colours  and  sounds.  They  were  al- 
ways talking  about  divine  truth,  and  yet  "  changed  the  ti*uth 
of  God  into  a  lie."  According  to  their  own  account,  a  por- 
tion of  the  truth  had  been  conveyed  to  them,  howsoever  imper- 
fectly, by  tradition :  but  *'  they  did  not  like  to  retain  God  in 
their  knowledge;"  they  despised  alike,  the  fears  of  hell,  and 
the  hopes  of  heaven,  and  even  denied  the  spirituality  and  im- 
mortality of  their  own  souls.  "  For  this  cause  God  gave 
them  up  to  vile  affections,"  and  "gave  them  over  to  a  re- 
probate mind,*'  and  to  a  reprobate  life.  Indilging  without 
restraint,  in  the  most  brutal  appetites,  they  seemed  indeed, 
as  if  they  had  no  soul  to  distinguish  them  from  the  inferior 
creation.  Let  who  will  glory  in  symbolizing  with  such  men, 
the  Christian  glories  in  nothing  but  the  cross  of  Christ,  by 
whom  he  is  crucified  to  the  world,  and  the  world  to  him. 

The  heathen  generally  believed  in  the  transmigration  of 
souls,  and  in  certain  periodical  conflagrations  or  annihila- 
tions of  souls,  succeeding  each  other  without  end.     From 

j  1^1,2;  591.  382.  38S. 


262 

these  the  Jews  have  rceeived  a  soii;  of  UniversJilism ;  and  by 
these,  Origen  was  corrupted.  Besides  him,  my  opponent  can 
find  no  other  example  in  the  ancient  church.  "  Simon  Ma- 
*'  gus,  Biisilides,  Carpocrates,  and  the  impure  Gnostics,  we 
"  do  not  envy  him  f'^  as  they  were,  like  their  brethren  of 
the  present  day,  in  the  gall  of  bitterness  and  the  bonds  of 
iniquity.  On  this  doctrine,  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  the  pre- 
ceptor of  Origen,  was  decidedly  orthodox ;  and  so  was  Cy- 
prian, his  great  contemporary,  whose  superiority  in  piety 
and  usefulness,  the  Christian  world  so  much  admires. 

Among  the  many  proofs  of  their  doctrinal  soundness,  I 
have  numbered  the  inspired  declaration  concerning  Tarta- 
rus. It  is  in  2  Peter,  ii.  4.  "  God  spared  not  the  angels  that 
"  sinned,  but  cast  them  do\^  n  to  Tartarus^  and  delivered 
**  them  into  chains  of  darkness,  to  be  reserved  unto  judg- 
*'  ment."  The  questions  suggested  by  this  text,  are,  I.  What 
docs  this  threatening  mean  ?  2.  Against  whom  is  it  directed  ? 

(i.)  What  does  this  threatening  mean  ?  That  it  is  a  threat- 
ening, is  evident,  because  the  subjects  of  it  are  said  not  to  be 
spared,  but  cast  down,  and  confined  in  chains  of  darkness,  <o 
he  punished,  as  we  are  informed  in  verse  9th.  That  it 
reaches  beyond  this  life,  as  far  as  men  are  concerned,  ap- 
pears from  their  being  reserved  unto  judgment.  "  It  is  ap- 
pointed unto  men  once  to  die,  but  after  this  the  judgment."' 
That  the  judgment  will  rivet  these  chains,  appears  from 
Jude's  calling  them,  in  verse  6th,  "  everlasting  chains,"  and 
from  his  placing  these  prisoners,  in  verse  7th,  with  the  in- 
habitants of  Sodom  and  Gomorrha,  who  are  "  suffering  the 
vengeance  of  eternal  fire."  Peter  also,  places  them  in  tJie 
same  company,  in  verse  6th,  of  the  context.  Of  these  per- 
sons it  is  said  in  verse  3rd,  the  immediately  preceding  con- 
text, that  their  '^judgment  now  of  a  long  time  lingereth  not, 
and  ihcxr damnation  slumbereth  not."  These  words  have  al- 
ready been  examined  in  the  original,  in  what  was  said  on 
the  subject  of  Gehenna.  There  they  were  translated  dam- 
nation and  destruction  :  and  it  was  proved  from  the  Scrip- 
tures, that  tliese  are  an  everlasting  destruction,  and  an  eter- 
nal damnation,  in  an  unquenchable  fire.  As  "  fools  make  a 
mock  at  sin,"  so  fools  will  laugh  at  its  punishment :  but  let 
it  be  remembered  that  this  is  done  only  by  Mr.  Balfour  and 
his  heathens,  not  by  the  Christian  Church  :  and  concerning 


k  Lampe,  on  the  Eternity  of  Punishments,  Part  2,  Sect.  10. 
I  Hebr.  ix.  27. 


263 

these  scorners,  God  has  said,  "  I  also,  will  laugh  at  your  caj- 
lamity,  I  will  mock  when  your  fear  conietli." 

(2.)  Against  whom  is  tliis  Tartarean  punishment  threat- 
ened I  It  was  against  "  the  angels  that  sinned."  In  the  6th 
head  of  the  first  Oi'thodox  argument,  1  have  endeavoured  to 
shew,  that  the  curse  has  subjected  sinners  to  a  real  devil,  and 
not  a  mere  personification.  That  he  has  angels  distinct 
from  the  human  race,  appears  from  the  sentence  of  condem- 
nation pronounce<l  upon  unbelieving  men  at  the  day  of  judg- 
ment. *'  Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire, 
prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels.'^''  These  angels,  men- 
tioned by  Peter,  my  opponent  and  the  improved  version, 
would  liave  to  be  men :  but  this  cannot  be  :  for  Peter,  in  the 
context,  saystliat  angels  "are  greater  in  power  and  might.'* 
They  cannot  be  non  entities;  for  sucli  have  neither  power 
nor  might.  But  two  things  are  manifest,  from  what  our 
Saviour  and  his  inspired  Apostle  say  concerning  these  an- 
gels. One  is,  that  it  was  on  account  of  sin.  that  they  were 
cast  into  Tartarus,  or  this  everlasting  Jire.  The  other  is,  that 
the  same  punishment  awaits  all  impenitent  sinners  of  the 
human  race.  In  the  9th  verse,  Peter  says, "  The  Lord  know^- 
*'  eth  how  to  deliver  the  godly  out  of  temptation,  and  to  re- 
'*  serve  the  unjust  unto  the  day  of  judgment,  to  be  punished." 
In  the  1st,  2d,  and  3d  verses,  he  speaks  of  the  preachers  and 
deluded  professors  of"  damnable  heresies,"  as  participating 
in  X\\t  judgment  and  damnation  of  these  angels.  In  the  three 
following  verses,  he  presents  the  case  of  these  intartarated 
angels,  the  case  of  the  antediluvian  world,  and  that  of  the 
cities  of  the  plain,  as  so  many  examples  to  warn  all  sinners 
against  the  same  condemnation  and  punishment ;  letting  us 
know,  that"  if  God  spared  not"  these,  he  will  punish  all  the 
"  unjust"  of  our  race. 

When  our  Saviour  commands  the  wicked  to  depart  into 
*'  everlasting  fire,"  or  as  he  afterward  explains  it,  into 
"  CAerlasting  punishment,"  his  omitting  to  use  the  word  now 
in  question,  may  appear  to  weaken  our  argument  But 
when  we  observe  on  the  one  hand  that  Christ  casts  wicked 
men,  and  the  devil,  and  his  angels,  all  together,  into  the  same 
fiery  and  eternal  punishment; — and  when  we  observe,  on  the 
other  hand,  tliat  an  unsparing  God  casts  these  angels  d(jwn 
to  Tartarus ; — cannot  a  moderate  reasoner  see  that  the  de- 
vil and  wicked  men  must  be  in  Tartarus  too  ? —  Tartarus, 
then,  is  that  everlasting  fire  wliich  is  "  prepared  for  the  devil 
and  his  angels :"— and  Tartarus  is  that  place  of  everlasting 


264 

punishment,  into  which  the  wicked  '*  shall  go  away"  after- 
the  general  judgment 

Thus  have  I  endeavoured  to  shew  the  scriptural  doctrine 
of  SheoU  Hades ^  Gehenna,  and  Tartarus.  I  have  essayed  to 
prove,  what  has  been  proved  a  thousand  times  before,  that 
these  terms  are  used  by  the  inspii'ed  writers,  to  denote  a 
state  of  eternal  punishment ;  and  that  all  those  passages  in 
which  wicked  men  or  angels  are  said  to  be  cast  into  hell^  are 
infallible  proofs  that  their  punishment  is  absolutely  eternal. 
In  doing  this,  with  a  conscience  enlightened  by  the  word  and 
Spirit  of  Christ,  and  with  a  heart  full  of  love  to  your  souls, 
my  skirts  are  clear  of  your  blood.  Without  attempting  to 
excite  unprofitable  fears,  I  have  endeavoured,  through  grace 
faithfully  to  warn  you,  of  the  wrath  which  awaits  the  impen- 
itent and  unbelieving.  May  God  enable  you  to  fke  to  the 
only  Refuge  for  lost  sinners. 

II. 
THE  DURATION  OF  PUNISHMENT. 

The  first  branch  of  affirmative  evidence,  which  we  have 
just  now  finished,  discusses  certain  conspicuous  words  of 
Holy  AVrit,  which  denote  the  stale  of  the  damned ;  and  it  was 
shewn  that  this  was  an  eternal  state.  The  second  branch  of 
affirmative  evidence,  on  which  we  are  now  entering,  contem- 
plates such  words  as  perpetual  and  eternal,  never  and /or- 
ever^  which  mark  the  duration  of  this  punishment,  in  a  still 
more  pointed  manner.  Concerning  Edom,  God  said,  "  Thou 
*'  shalt  be  cut  ofS forever.'*'*  "They  shall  call  them  the  border 
•'  of  wickedness,  and  the  people  against  whom  the  Lord  hath 
"  indignation  forever.''''  "And  when  he  looked  on  Amalek, 
"  he  took  up  his  parable,  and  said,  Amalek  was  the  first  of 
**  the  nations,  but  his  latter  end  shall  be,  that  he  perish  /br- 
*•'  ever.'''*  '*  And  he  also  [the  scourge  of  the  Jew^s]  shall  perish 
^^ forever. ^^  "If  thou  forsake  him,  he  will  cast  thee  off /or- 
''  ever."  "  But  the  Lord  is  with  me,  as  a  mighty  terrible  one : 
''  therefore  my  persecutors  shall  stumhle  and  they  shall  not 
''  prevail :  they  shall  be  greatly  ashamed  ;  for  they  shall  not 
•*  prosper:  their  everlasting  confusion  shall  never  beforgot- 
'*  ten."  '*  The  Lord  hath  sworn  by  the  excellency  of  Jacob, 
"  surely  I  will  never  forget  any  of  their  works.'*  "  And  I 
**  will  bring  an  everlasting  reproach  upon  you,  and  a  perpe- 
*'  tual  shame,  which  shall  not  be  forgotten."  *«  When  all  the 
*^  workers  of  iniquity  do  flourish ;  it  is  that  they  shall  be  de- 
*■*  stroyed  forever.^'  "  He  put  them  to  a  perpetual  reproach." 
•*  Let  them  be  confounded  and  troubled  forever  ;  yea,  let 


265 

'*  them  be  put  to  sliaine,  and  perish."  "They  perish /brewer, 
*'  without  any  regarding  it."  "Thou  destroye>;t  the  hope  of 
*'  man.  Thou  prevailest  forever  against  him."  '*  He  shall  go 
"  to  the  generation  of  his  fatiiers :  they  shall  weuer  see  light.'* 
**  Thou  hast  rebuked  the  heathen,  thou  liast  destroyed  the 
*'  wicked,  thou  hast  put  out  their  name  forever  and  ear.'** 
After  deatlj,  *'hc  sliall  go  to  the  generation  of  his  fathers; 
"  they  sliall  never  see  light."    *'  God  shall  likewise  destroy 
"  thee  /ore  yer."  "And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust 
*'  of  the  eai'th  shall  awake,  nowx^io  ever lastitufWi^i,  and  some 
**  to  shame  and  everlasting  contempt."  "  AVho  among  us  shall 
"  dwell  with  everlasting  burnings  ?"    "  The  smoke  thereof 
"  shall  go  uj)  forever.'''  "For  ye  have  kindled  a  fire  in  mine 
'*  ang' r,  which  sh  ill  burn  /oreyer."  "  But  he  that  shall  blas- 
**  pheine  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  hath  never  forgi  »eness,  hut 
*'  is  in  danger  of  eternal   damnation."    "  These  are  wells 
"  without  water;  clouds  that  are  carried  with  a  tempest;  to 
'*  whom  the  mist  of  darkness  is  reserved ybreuer."  "  Raging 
*'  \vaves  of  the  sea,  foaming  out  their  own  shame;  wander- 
"  ing  stars,  to  whom  is  reserved  tlie  blackness  of  darkness 
"/orewer."  "  And  the  smoke  of  their  torment  ascendeth  up 
'^forever  and  ever,  and  tiieyhave  jioiestday  nor  night,  who 
**  worship  the  lieast  and  his  image,  and  whosoever  receiveth 
**  the  mark  of  his  name."  "  And  again,  they  said,  Alleluia. 
*'  And  her  smoke  rose  up  forever  and  ever.'''  "And  the  Devil 
"  that  deceived  them,  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  and  brim- 
"  stone,  where  the  beast  atid  the  false  prophet  are,  and  shall 
**  be  tormented,  day  and  night,  forever  and  ever  :'*  with  an 
"  e^er«a/ judgment,  [condemnal'ion,  ov  punishment.y  "Even 
"  as  Sodom  and  Gomorrha,  and  the  cities  about  them,  in  like 
*'  manner,  giving  themselves  over  to  fornication,  and  going 
**  after  strange  flesh,  are  set  forth  for  an  example,  suffering 
*'  the  vengeance  of  eternal  fire.'*  "  Who  shall  be  punished 
**  with  everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord, 
**  and  from  the  glory  of  his  power."     "  Wherefore,  if  t}iy 
"  hand  or  thy  foot  offend  thee,  cut  them  off:  for  it  is  better 
*'  for  thee  to  enter  into  life  halt  or  maimed,  rather  than  hav- 
"  iny-  two  hands  or  two  feet,  to  be  cast  into  everlasting  fire.'* 
"  Then  shall  he  say  unto  them  on  the  left  hand,  depart  from 
*'  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil 
♦*  andliis  angels."  "  And  these  shall  go  away  into  everlasting 
*'  punishment,  but  the  righteous  into  life  eternaW'^^ 

m  Obad  i,  10.   Mai.  i.  4.    Num.  xxiv.  20, 24.     1  Chr.  xxviii.  9.     Jer.  xx.  11. 
Am.  tiii.  7.  Jer.  xxHi.  40.  Job  i?.  20.  xiv.  20.    Pa:  xpii.  7.  Ixxviii.  66.   Ixxxiii.  17« 


26() 

From  all  this  evidence,  which  is  given  in  the  words  of  our 
connaon  translation,  the  Universalists  are  in  the  habit  of  ap- 
pealing to  the  Original  Scrij)turcs.  Tliither  we  are  willing 
to  follow  them.  But  when  they  are  heateu  on  this  ground, 
and  begin  to  complain  of  our  speaking  in  an  unknown  tongue, 
let  it  be  remembered,  who  first  found  fault  wit!i  our  transla- 
tion ;  who  first  appealed  to  the  Hebrew  language ',  and  \s  ho 
first  prated  about  an  cBonian  punishmeiit. 

The  above  authorities  ai'e  found  in  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
taiiBcnts.  Of  course,  they  are  in  different  languages;  and, 
(what  is  not  unusual,)  the  same  word  is  used  in  our  Version, 
to  render  a  variety  of  words  in  the  Original.  The  Hebiew 
words  \ejeh,  Od,  and  O'am^  are  all  interpreted  everlastings 
perpetual  always,  and  forever:  and  certain  Greek  woi'ds 
and  phrases,  dorived  from  Aion^  are  rendered  ever/asthig, 
eternalyforever^  send  forever  and  ever.  If  it  be  a  fact  that  the 
Spii'it  of  God  often  uses  these  woi'ds  and  j)hrases  to  denote 
an  absolute  eternity;  and  if  there  be  particular  reason  dis- 
covered why  they  should  be  so  understood,  in  the  above  pas- 
sages relating  to  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  ;  then  a  good 
conscience  will  oblige  us  to  believe,  tliat  the  wicked  are  ])un- 
ishedto  an  absolute  eternity.  For  the  support  of  this  con- 
clusion, the  premises  shall,  with  the  help  of  God,  be  now 
established,  in  the  critical  examination  of  the  following  par- 
ticulars. 1.  ^ejeh.  2.  Od.  3.  Olam.  4.  ^ion.  5.  Eis- 
Aiona,     6.  Jiionios.n 

1. 
NEJEH. 

This  word  often  signifies  victor}/:  as  in  Hah.  i.  4.  "Judg- 
ment does  not  go  forth  to  victory.'*^  Our  translators,  with 
Junius  and  Tremellius,  thought  this  the  meaning  of  it  in  Is. 
XXV.  8.  "lie  will  swallow  up  death  in  victory.''*  The  Vul- 
gate and  Calasio  have  rendered  iiforever,^  Although  Bishop 
Pearce  has,  if  1  recollect  rightly,  endeavoured  to  reconcile 
this  with  Paul's  Greek,  in  1  Cor.  xv.  54,p  our  translators 
were  probably  right,  as  they  are  generally.  Be  this  as  it 
may,  my  opponent  and  others  of  the  same  pi'inciples,  quote 


xlix.  19.  ix.  5.  lii.  5.  Dun.  xii.  2.  Is.  xxxiii.  14.  xxxiv.  10.  Jer.  xrii.  4  Mk.  iii.  29. 
2  Pet.  ii.  17,  Jude  13.  Uuv.  xiv.  fl.  xix.  3.  xx.  10.  Ueb.  vi.  2.  Jude  7.  2Thes8< 
i.  9.  Matt,  xviii.  8.  xxv.  41.  40. 

o  In  scnipiternum. 

P   filg  VIXOP. 


267 

this  passage  in  favoiiv  of  universal,  eternal  salvation.  Thcj 
have  gi'anted  this  force  to  the  word,  in  such  passages  as  tlie 
following;  "  He  will  not  always  chide:"  "  Neither  will  1  be 
a/ivai/s  wroth."q  Those  wlio  believe  that  the  miry  places  of 
li-i\hy\ox\^  ?i.w\  i\\Q,viarshes  thereof^  sliall  not  be  healed,  will 
allow  this  word  the  same  force,  where  Isaiah  says  that  "it 
shall  never  be  inhabited;"  and  Jeremiah  says  that  "it  shall 
be  no  more  irdiabited/oreyer.'  In  denouncing  a  similar  curse 
upon  Idumea,  Isaiah  doubles  the  word,  "  None  shall  pass 
.  through  '\t  forever  and  (?yer."i-  This  appears  to  be  its  meaning 
in  Fs.  xlix.  9,  where  it  is  said  of  the  rich  voluptuaries  of  this 
world,  that  "  none  of  them  can  by  any  means  redeem  his 
brother,  nor  give  to  God  a  ransom  for  him  :"  "  that  he  should 
still  \\\&  forever.'"' 

The  I9th  verse  of  this  Psalm  is  one  of  the  authorities  quo- 
ted above  for  eternal  puiushmcnt.  After  this  wealthy  world- 
ling dies,  it  is  said  that  •'  he  shall  go  to  the  generation  of  his 
fathers ;  they  shall  never  see  light."  if  tlie  generation  of  his 
fathers  felt  toward  him,  as  the  rich  sensualist  in  the  gospel 
felt  toward  his  five  bi  etiiren,  they  did  not  wish  him  to  come 
into  their  place  of  torment.  As  it  was  declared  that  they  ne- 
ver should  enjoy  the  light  of  life,  the  pains  of  the  second  death 
would  be  aggravated  by  the  company  of  a  guilty  descendant, 
to  whose  ruin  they  were  accessary. 

In  another  passage  adduced,  it  is  said  concerning  impious 
oppressors,  '*  The  Lord  hatb  sworn  by  the  excellency  of  J a- 
"  cob,  surely  I  will  never  forget  any  of  their  works."  When 
God  says  of  the  penitent,  '*I  will  be  merciful  to  their  unright- 
"  eousness,  and  their  sins  and  tlieir  iniquities  will  I  remem- 
'*  her  no  more,"  every  Universalist  sees  that  this  is  a  promise 
of  eternal  forgiveness.  When  he  says,  "  The  needy  shall  not 
alivays  be  forgotten,''  every  one  understands  this  to  be  a  pro- 
mise of  efcrnul  salvation.  But  if  a  promise  that  God's  pious 
poor  shall  not  always  be  forgotten,  secures  their  eternal  iiap- 
piness,  is  it  diificult  to  see  that  eternal  misery  awaits  those 
sinners,  concerning  whom  the  excellency  of  Jacob  swears  by 
himself,  "  Surely  I  will  never  forget  any  of  their  works  ?'* 
The  duration  of  the  blessing  in  the  one  case,  and  of  the  curse 
in  the  other,  is  marked  by  the  same  word.^ 

In  a  third  authority  advanced,  the  Psalmist  threatens  the 

q  Ps.  ciii.  9.  Is.  lyii.  16.  The  references  are  always  to  the  Englisli  Bible. 

^  D^nV^  nVi  7.  Is.  xxxiv.  10.  xiii.  20.  Jer.  I.  S9.  Comp.  Ez.  xlvii.  II. 
s  Amos  Tiii.7.  Ps.  ix.  18,  Comp,  Heb.  Tiii.  12.  Gen.  kxvU,  45. 


268 

deceitftil,  lying,  mischievous  tongue,  "  God  shall  likewise 
destioy  thee /or  fi'e/\"t  If,  as  the  apostle  James  tells  us,  this 
tongue  "  is  set  on  hi-e  of  /je//,"  then  it  must  he  destroyed  for 
ever:  for  hell  is  a  place  of  everlasting  destruction,  as  was 
shewn  under  the  word  Gehenna,  A  few  evideuces,  that  the 
same  doctiine  of  the  destruction  of  the  wicked,  is  contained 
in  the  Old  Testament,  which  was  there  asserted  from  the 
New,  will  close  this  article. 

Universalists  and  other  pretenders  to  religion,  are  prone 
to  in-julge  delusive  hopes  of  escaping  this  destruction:  hut 
God  says,  "the  hypocrite's  hope  shall  perish^  or  be  destroy- 
erf.'u  They  expect  always  to  fly  to  their  refuges  of  lies;  but 
the  tiiiie  is  coming  when,  as  God  says,  "  flight  shall  perish 
from  the»n."v  They  v\'ould  vainly  persuade  themselves  that 
they  jiave  no  other  destrucfio:i  to  fear,  but  that  which  precedes 
death  ,^^  and  that,  after  death,  their  hopes  sliall  be  fulfilled. 
But  Solomon  says,  "  When  a  wicked  man  dieth,  his  expecta- 
"  tions  shall  perish^  or  he  destroyed :  and  the  hope  of  unjust 
"  men  perisheth^  or  is  destroyed.'*'^  1 1  was  not  said  of  Amalek 
that  he  should  sustain  a  tempoi*al  destruction  in  the  prime  of 
lift;  but  "  his  latter  end  shall  he,  that  he  perish  foiever."z 
This  destruction  is  never  said  in  scripture  to  be  sent  in  love 
for  the  sanctifiration  of  the  subject;  but  "by  the  blast  of 
"  God  they  perish,  or  are  destroyed^  and  by  the  bieath  of  his 

*  nostrils  ai'e  they  consumed."  "The  wicked  shall  perish,  or 
"  be  destroyed^  and  the  enemies  of  the  Lord  shall  be  as  the  fat 
"  of  lambs  :  they  shall  consume  ;  into  smoke  shall  they  con- 
"  sume  away."  *'  As  smoke  is  driven  away,  so  drive  them 
'*  away :  as  wax  melteth  before  the  fire,  so  let  the  wicked 
'*  perish,  or  be  destroyed,  at  the  presence  of  God.''»  Concern- 
ing the  worshippers  of  the  Pope,  that  irreconcileable  enemy 
of  Christ  and  his  word,  Daniel  says,  "- 1  beheld,  even  till  the 
"  Beast  was  slain,  and  his  body  destroyed,  and  given  to  the 

*  burning  flame.''^ 

The  above  passages  do  not  expressly  declare  that  this  de- 
struction is  in  Sheotov  Gehenna,  or  the  bottomless  pit;  but 
other  Scriptures  do.     It  will  be  recollected  that  under  the 


t  Ps.  lii.  5, 

u  .Jol>  viii.  13. 

T  Job  xi.  '20.  Marginal  reading.    CalasLo  ;  *'  Refugium  peribit  ab  eis." 

w  >tt'  Job  xxviii.  22. 

■J.  Job  xi.  7. 

2  Num.  xxiv.  20, 

a  J')i.  IV.  y.  Ps.  xxxvii.  2©.  Ixtiii.  2- 

%  Dan.  Til.  U. 


269 

first  branch  of  this  argument,  the  destruction^  which,  in'ftie 
New  restamoil,  is  caUeti  4/;y/t7rt,  (from  wliicli  the  name  of 
Appofii/uH  is  titi'ivcd,)  was  shc\Mi  to  take  place  in  Geheii' 
na,  which  was  a  place  of  punishnienl;  by  hic  after  death. 
Tile  (it  struction  nienlioned  above,  is  by  a  burning  Hanie,  alter 
the  subject  of  it  is  slain.  The  Hebrew  for  destroy^  in  the 
above  texts,  is  abad,^  and  for  deslruction,  Abadun.  Tyalasio 
very  justly  observes  that  in  Job  xxvi.  6,  this  Abadun  is  used 
*'fi)r  the  thing  destroyed, p/u  re.perada.^"'''  .Sheoi  is  naked  be- 
foi'e  him,  and  Abadun  hath  m>  coveiing.'*  Who  tliis  Abadun^ 
this  son  of  desti'uction  is,  the  Apostle  Jolm  tells  us.  After 
describing  a  destructive  army,  he  says,  '•'■And  they  hcH,  a 
"  King  over  them,  vviiich  is  the  angel  of  the  bottomless  pit, 
"  whose  name  in  the  Hebrew  ton.^ue,  is  Abaddon,  but  in  the 
*'  Greek  tongue,  iiatli  his  name  Apoilijon.''''  Thattliis  destruc- 
tion is  in  hell,  with  fallen  angels,  appears  farther  from  the 
case  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram.  M  Ijen  "  they  pens/ied 
or  were  destroyed  from  among  the  congregation,"  it  was  by 
going  down  ''  into  ^heot^"*  or  "  into  Hades ;^*  as  the  Septua- 
gint  has  it.''  This  was  done  by  the  just  judgment  of  an  angry 
God:  for  Solomon  says,  '■'■  Sheol  and  Abadun,  [or (70)  Haules 
and  Apoleia^  are  before  the  Lord."  When  sinners  rejjent 
and  believe  in  the  Saviour,  God  s  law  and  justice  are  saJis- 
jied  through  his  atonement.  Their  light  afflictions  would 
then  be  temporal.  But  if  they  do  not  repent,  their  sufferings 
must  be  eternal;  for  God  has  said  that "  Sheol  and  Abadun  are 
never  satisfied.'e  The  road  which  leads  to  destruction  is 
said  in  Scripture,  to  be  a  broad  way.f  The  Psalmist  uses  the 
word  way,  as  a  figure  for  the  ungodly  multitudes  who  walk 
in  tills  way  of  perdition.  In  this  sense,  he  says,  "  the  way 
of  the  ungodly  shall  perish  or  be  destroyed.^'s  In  tlie  use  of 
the  word  nejeh,  which  is  now  under  discussion,  Job  says, 
**  They  perish  forever^  without  any  regarding  it."'* 


OD. 

Concerning  the  God  of  Israel,  David  says  to  Solomon, "  If 
thou  forsake  him,  he  will  cast  thee  off  forever.'^  The  same 
word  occurs  in  the  declaration  tliat  Amaiek  and  otlier  ene- 
mies of  tlie  church  "shall  pei'ish/orever.'*    The   Psalmist 

o  This  holds  in  all  except  the  last,  Dan.  vii.  11 ,  which  Daniel  wrote  in  Chaldee; 
and  where  the  word  is  ejibed,  only  a  dialectical  variation, 
d  Num.  xvi.  33. 
e  Prov.  xxvii.  20.  f  Matt.  vii.  13.  g  Ps.  i.    .  h  Job  iv*  20. 


270 

says,  "  When  the  wicked  spring  as  the  grass,  and  when  all 
"  the  workers  of  iniquity  do  flourish ;  it  is  that  they  shall  be 
*'  destroyedybrei/'^r."  ''Let  them  be  confounded  and  troubled 
"forever;  yea  let  them  be  put  to  shame  and  perish."' 

It  is  freely  admitted  that  this  word  does  not  always  con- 
note e^frrta/ duration  :  but  that  it  is  used  familiarly  for  this 
purpose,  is  evident  from  its  frequent  connexion  with  the  ex- 
istence, glory,  and  perfections  of  God  ;  and  w  ith  the  happi- 
ness of  the  saints  :  and  that  it  has  this  signification,  in  the 
passages  just  now  quoted,  appears  from  its  connexion  with 
that  destruction^  which  is  absolutely  eternal. 

Concerning  God,  it  is  said,  "  His  righteousness  endurcth 
forever.''''  "  His  praise  endureth/o/eyer."  "  Thus  saith  tlie 
High  and  Lofty  One,  that  inhabiteth  eternity.*'  Tow  ards  his 
people,  it  is  said,  that  •■'  He  rctaineth  not  his  anger  forever.** 
Therefore  they  shall  love  and  enjoy  him  for  ever.  This  is' 
proved  by  the  follow  ing  and  similar  texts  :  •'  The  fear  of  the 
Lord  is  clean,  enduring/orei;er."  Concerning  the  heavenly 
Canaan,  it  is  said,  "  The  righteous  shall  inherit  the  land,  and 
dwell  therein  for  ever.**  **  Your  heart  shall  live  for  ever.'* 
"  Thou  hast  made  him  most  blessed /or  ever.''  "  So  will  I  sing 
praise  unto  thy  name /or  ever.**  "  His  seed  also  will  1  make 
to  endure/or  cfcr."  "His  righteousness  end  ureth /or  fu^r." 
"  The  lip  of  truth  shall  be  established /or  ever.*""  ''  Trust  ye 
in  the  Lord /or  ever.** 

The  most  of  those  passages  in  which  Orfis  connected  with 
Olam,  I  shall  postpone  to  the  next  head,  in  which  0/am  may 
be  particularly  considered.  Only  one  of  them  claims  atten- 
tion at  this  time.  It  is  that  in  which  God  says  to  Israel, 
"  Ye  shall  not  be  ashamed  nor  confounded  world  without  end.** 
The  original  is,  "  od  oulami  od'*  As  or/ sometimes  signifies 
an  indefinite,  and  sometimes  an  infinite  futurity,  I  would  ren- 
der this  passage  literally,  as  follows :  "  Ye  shall  not  be 
ashamed  nor  confounded  to  the  eternities  of  futurity^  or,  to  the 
eternities  of  infinite  duration.*' 

Concerning  this  phrase,  my  opponent  speaks  in  the  follow - 
ing  manner,  viz.  "  I  now  again  repeat,  that  if  my  opponent 
**  can  shew,  that  the  expression,  od  oulami  od.,  which  1  am 
**  willinff  to  admit  may  signify  an  absolute  eternity,  is  any 
^  w  here  in  the  sacred  volume,  used  in  connexion  with  punish- 
"  ment,  misery  or  death,  then  he  has  the  argument ;  and  if 
*  not,  it  is  evident,  that  what  I  said  yesterday,  still  stands 

i  1  C'hr.  xxviii.  9.  Num.  xxiv.  20,  24.  Ps.  xcii.  f .  Ixxxiii.  17.  In  the  2n'l  anfl 
3rd  of  these  texis,  the  plural  »"|  W  's  used. 


271 

*'  sure,  and  we  may  fairly  conclude  that  he  caniiot  do  it."j 
This  declaration  is  here  introduced,  because  it  contains  a 
concession,  tluit  the  phrase  in  question  sitjnilies  an  absolute 
eternity :  otherwise,  how  could  I  gain  the  argument  by  shew- 
ing it  in  connexion  with  punishment?  Now  if  these  words 
together,  signify  an  absolute  eternity,  at  least  one  of  them 
alone,  must  have  tliis  meaning,  independently  of  its  relation 
to  the  other.  ./2u  absolute  eternity  cannot  be  formed,  by  any 
possible  addition  or  multiplication  of  limited  periods.  If 
oulam  mean  a  limited  time,  and  if  o</ mean  nothing  more  than 
this,  then,  oidami  od  would  mean,  the  times  of  limitation.  But 
this' would  contradict  my  opponent,  who  says  that  this  ex- 
pression signifies  an  absolute  eternity.  Himself,  tlierefore, 
being  judge,  one  of  them  must  havetliis  signification.  Which 
will' he  choose  ?  He  has  told  us.  After  pretending  to  weigh 
his  translation  and  mine,  he  says,  ''  In  neither  way  does  it 

imply  that  0*7*)^  oulam,  of  itself,  means  an  absolute  eternity.*''^ 
He  teaches  us  that  oulami  signifies  limited  aii;es.  Unless  there- 
fore orf  signifies  eternity,  tins  expression  will  signify  nothing 
more  thsm  ages  of  limita-iGn.  To  make  out  his  p(»int,  my 
opponent  must  hold  that  od  is  eternity.  He  would  then  trans- 
late the  passage,  "  Ye  shall  not  be  ashamed  nor  confound- 
ed to  the  ages  of  eternity.''*  But  if  this  be  true,  where  are  those, 
concerning  whom  the  Psalmist  says,  "  Let  them  be  con- 
founded and  troubled  to  od,  to  eterniiyV  All  those  authorities 
which  are  quoted  in  the  commencement  of  this  article,  will, 
according  to  tliis  interpretation,  consign  unbelievers  to  an 
absolute  eternity  of  suflcring. 

3. 

OLAM. 

This  word  occurs  in  the  singular  and  the  plural  numbei"s, 
and  in  different  forms.  In  the  singular,  it  is  olam,  ovlam, 
and  eoutam.  In  the  plural,  it  is  oulamim ;  unless  Avhen  in  go- 
vernment, as  in  the  example  given  in  the  last  aiticJe :  in 
which  case  it  is  oulami.  Why  it  should  signify  eternity,  when 
used  in  any  form,  or  in  either  number,  I  may  not  be  able  to 
tell.  It  should  suffice,  for  me  to  prove  the  fact.  Many  au- 
thorities have  been  given,  in  which  this  word  is  connected 
with  the  punishment  of  the  wicked.  If,  therefore,  it  can  be 
shewn  that  this  word  signifies  an  eternal  duration,  the  wicked 
must  be  punished  for  ever. 

j  Minutes  p.  16S.  k  Minutes  p.  175. 


272 

As  the  instance  cited  nnder  the  last  head,  presents  this 
word  in  ihe  pluial  nunibci',  I  shall  mention  other  examples 
in  which  it  is  found  in  the  plural,  unconnected  with  od.  If 
we  examine  the  whole  oi  the  61st  Psalm,  we  shall  find  that 
David  points  to  an  eternal  residence  with  God,(comp  verse 
7,)  wheti  he  says,  in  \erse  4,  "  I  will  ahide  in  thy  tabernacle 
OULAMIM, /or  ewer.*'  In  an  address  to  Jehovah,  the  same 
writer  says,  "  Thy  kingdom  is  a  kingc'om  of  kal  olamim, 
all efernilics.'*^  Did,  or  did  not  the  Psalmist  mean,  that  the 
kingdom  of  Jehovah  was  absolufely  eternal?  It  has  already 
been  noticed  that  Dan.  ix.  24,  isnrged  by  my  opponent  and 
other  Universal ists,  in  favour  of  their  system.  It  is  there 
said,  that  the  Messiah  shall  *'  make  an  end  of  sins,"  and 
"  bring  in  everlasting  righteousness  ''  This,  they  think,  esta- 
blishes the  doctrine,  that  sin  is  temporal,  but  righteousness 
absolutely  eternal.  But  let  it  be  remembered  that  the  word 
for  everlasting  in  this  text,  is  olamim^  Does  this  mean  less 
than  eternal  ? 

In  Isa.  xlv.  1 7,  where  this  word  governs  or/,  it  is  found  in 
the  former  part  of  the  verse,  without  that  connexion.  On 
this  my  opponent  speaks  as  follows,  viz.  "  The  passage  re- 
"  ferred  to  reads  thus :  '  But  Israel  sliall  he  saved  in  the 
*'  Lord,  with  an  («>ulamim)  everlasting  salvation.'  In  this 
"  former  part  of  the  verse,  there  is  no  difference  between  me 
"  and  my  opponent,  we  are  perfectly  agreed  with  respect  to 
f' their  everlasting  salvation;  it  is  in  the  latter  clause  only, 
"  that  there  is  any  collision  between  us.  '  Ye  shall  not  be 
"  ashamed  noi'  (onfounded  (od  oulami  od)  world  without 
"  mt?,'  "iv.  It  will  be  recollected  that  these  are  the  words  of 
my  Universalist  0})p;!nent,  stating  waetcin  we  agree,  and 
wherein  we  disaa:rec,  concerning  the  same  text.  Our  disa- 
g)-eement  is  on  the  meaning  o^ou'ami  in  the  latter  clause  of  the 
verse.  I  say  that  it  signifies  an  absolute  eternity.  He  denies 
that  this  word,  "  of  itself,  meansan  absolute  eternity.""  This 
is  the  "collision"  of  which  bespeaks.  Now,  what  is  the 
subject,  inMhich  he  says  we  ai-e  *'  perfectly  agreed  ?"  It  is 
concerning  this  same  word  oulamim,  with  the  same  applica- 
tion, and  in  the  same  verse,  but  otily  in  the  former  part  of  the 
verse.  I  say  that  it  nutans  absolutely  eternal,  and  so  does  he; 
for  otherwise,  we  could  not  be  "  perfectly  agreed."  In  both 
cases  it  is  predicated  of  the  salvation  of  the  saints.  I  say  that 

1  P«.  cxlv.  13. 

ra  Minutes,  p.  163. 

n  MinuUB,  p.  175. 


273 

both  cases,  it  has  the  same  meaning-.  He  thinks  that  there  is 
an  infinite  difference  in  its  meaning  ;  as,  in  one  instance,  it 
signifies  an  eternal,  and  in  the  other  a  temporary  duration  ! ! 
Let  him  shew  a  reason  for  this  difference,  and  it  shall  have 
its  weight:  hut  let  him  not  expect  that  you  will  give  the  name 
of  criticism,  to  an  empty  assertion,  not  only  without  evidence, 
but  contrary  to  all  sober  rules  of  interpretation* 

But  you  will  ask,  how  it  comes  h-  pass,  that  he  disputes 
the  force  ofthese  words  in  the  latter  clause  of  this  verse,  with- 
in a  few  breaths  of  a  concession,  that  they  "  may  signify  an 
absolute  eternity  ,"  and  an  admission,  that  the  same  expres- 
sion, in  connexion  with  punishment,  would  prove  its  eternity. 
That  he  has  thus  contradicted  himself,  is  certain  :  and  as  I 
have  made  use  of  his  admission  of  the  truth,  I  am  willing  to 
examine  his  reasoning  against  it.  It  rests  upon  a  counterfeit 
translation  of  the  passage,  coined  for  the  occasion.  He  says 
that  od  oularni  od,  should  be  rendered,  ^o  the  age  and  farther. 
By  this  he  proves  that  there  is  duration,  farther  than  the  age, 
or  beyond  oularni^  and  of  course,  oulami  cannot  mean  eternity. 
When  I  reminded  him  that  there  was  no  and  in  the  original, 
nor  even  in  the  Septuagint;  and  that  the  insertion  of  this  con- 
junction, in  such  a  translation  as  his,  was  a  perversion ;  he 
maintained  its  correctness,  and  quoted  Dan.  xii.  3,  to  prove  it. 
*'  And  they  that  be  wise,  shall  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the 
"  firmament :  and  they  that  turn  many  to  righteousness,  as 
"  the  stars /or  ever  AND  ever  ;  to  oulam  and  OD."  To  give 
a  more  complete  refutation  of  my  assertion,  lie  shews  that  the 
Septuagint  of  this  same  passage  in  Daniel,  has  the  conjunc- 
tion and.  It  reads,  "  EIS  TON  AiONA  KAI  ETI,  to  the  ao-e 
and  longer,^^  as  he  would  render  it.  He  attributes  the  very 
same  meaning  to  Isa.  xlv  17,  *"'  heos  ton  aionos  eti,'^  which  he 
renders  in  Latin,  '■''in  oetermim  ampliiis." 

As  this  is  an  Universalist  method  of  reasoning,  I  wish  it  to 
be  well  understood.  I  have  said  that  there  is  nu  and,  either 
in  the  original  or  the  Septuagint  of  Isa.  xlv.  17,  and  that  the 
insertion  of  this  conjunction  in  such  a  translation  as  his,  is  a 
perversion  of  the  scriptures.  Here  we  are  directly  at  issue: 
and  as  he  takes  the  affirmative,  he  produces  the  evidence. 
Alter  hearing  him  speak  so  often  of  my  ignorance  of  the  lan- 
guages, (a  fault  which  I  freely  confess,)  you  perhaps  tremble 
for  my  fate,  when  you  see  him  open  the  Hebrew  and  Greek 
scriptures.  You  expect  to  hear  him  read,  forthwith,  in  Isa. 
xlv.  17,  and  shew,  to  my  confusion,  that  it  contains  a  con- 
junction. Instead  of  this  he  turns  to  Dan.  xii.  3.  Here  wefin«l 

L  I. 


274 

li  conjunction  in  the  Hebrew,  Greek  and  English.  Where- 
fore, my  opponent  triumphantly  concludes  that  he  has  a  right 
to  insert  this  word  in  Isa.  xlv.  17,  where  it  is  not  tound.  But 
lest  this  reasoning  should  not  appear  conclusive,  even  to  his 
Own  followers,  he  reads  the  Septuagiut  of  Isaiah,  in  the  very 
text  itself.  This  is  coming  nearer  home  ;  and  you  expect  an 
English  translation  with  the  word  and  in  it.  Instead  of  this 
he  gives  it  to  you  in  Latin  ;  "  in  aeturnum  ampiius."  I  sup- 
pose he  thought  that  those  Universalists  who,  like  myself, 
were  ignorant  of  the  languages,  would  think  this  translation 
amply  furnished  with  conjunctions. 

When  ray  opponent  renders  OD  OULAMI  OU,  by  the  words, 
to  the  age  and  farther^  he  knows,  as  well  as  I  do,  that  oulami 
is  in  the  plural  number,  and  that  a  literal  translation,  which 
he  affects  to  make,  would  give  it  a  plural  rendering.  He 
knows  also,  that  if  there  were  a  conjunction  between  these 
words^  the  tirstof  them  would  be  written  oulamim  instead  of 
oulami.  The  dropping  of  the  last  letter,  shews  that  this  word 
governs  the  one  which  follows  it.  In  Western  languages, 
government  is  usually  marked  by  the  word  governed :  in  the 
Eastern,  by  a  change  in  the  word  which  governs.  Oulami 
has  in  itself,  the  force  of  a  genitive,  the  sign  of  which,  in  our 
language,  is  o/",  and  not  and.  If  therefore,  this  word  mean 
uyes^  and  if  od  mean  farther^  the  literal  rendering  of  this  ex- 
pression would  be,  to  the  ages  of  farther  I ! 

The  reason  why  ihe  Septuagint  have  not  marked  this  go- 
vernment in  the  usual  way,  is,  not  that  they  differed  from  our 
translators,  in  their  understanding  of  the  passage,  but  because 
they  used  the  little  indeclinable  word  eii^  which  is  frequently 
useu  to  translate  od,  and  which,  like  o</,  usually  signifies  in- 
dejiuiiii  or  infinite  duration;  generally  future,  but  sometimes 
past.  Job  says,  "Knowest  thou  not  this  ofoldT'o  The  He- 
brew here  for  <f  old,  is  meni  od.  Symmachus  renders  it,  ap^ 
AlONOS.  But  Trouimiiis  informs  us,  that  various  Greek  in- 
terpreters render  it  apo  ton  eti.  This  shews  that  eti  is  con- 
sidered a  proper  translation  of  orf,  when  it  means  duration 
past  or  future,  limited  or  onliujited.  But  take  notice  thatefi, 
though  indeclinable,  is  here  treated  as  a  noun  in  the  genitive 
case;  APO  TOU  ETi,  of  old.  Take  this  example  to  the  Sep- 
foagiiit  of  Isa.  xlv.  17,  and  you  can  easily  lind  why  it  did  not 
insert  a  conjunction.  ''■  Heos  tou  aionos  eti,''  is  literally  trans- 
lated, "Ho  the  eternity  of  futurity.'^  Except  in  its  changing 
the  number  of  the  governing  noun,  as  our  translators  have. 


275 

done,  and  as  my  opponent  has  done,  it  is  a  perfectly  literai 
rendering  o(  llie  original,  ""to  the  eternities  of  futurity.'* 

I  need  not  consume  your  time  in  quoting  evidence  that  eti 
denotes  an  indefinite  futurity. P  More  than  this  will  be  done, 
if  it  can  be  shewn  that  it  signifies  an  endless  futurity  Solo- 
mon says,  "  The  king  that  faithfully  judgeth  the  poor,  his 
-**  throne  shall  be  established  ybr  ever."'^  That  this  for  ever^ 
means  an  endless  futurity,  should  be  admitted  by  my  oppo- 
nent, since  he  believes  that  the  thrones  promised  to  the  apos- 
tles, are  to  endure  for  ever.  To  all  believers,  God  has  pro- 
mised *'a  kingdom  which  cannot  be  moved,''  an  incorrupti- 
ble crown,  "a  crown  of  glory  that  fadeth  not  away."r  This 
eternal,  heavenly  reward,  therefore,  is  that  throne,  which,  ac- 
cording to  the  proverb  just  quoted,  "shall  be  established/or 
€uer.'*  This  ever  is  od  in  the  Hebrew.  Trommius  informs 
us,  that  various  Greek  interpreters  render  the  phrase,  "  EiS 
AIONA,  to  eternity"  Symmacbus  renders  it,  "  EIS  AIEI,  to 
always.'  Aquila  renders  it,  *'  eis  ETI,  to  endless  duration  :'* 
for  what  less  can  eti  mean  here? 

In  the  New  Testament  one  single  verse  contains  this  word 
four  times,  in  such  ^  connexion,  thdi  even  iSemi-UniversalistSi 
who  deny  the  faithfulness  of  God  in  the  execution  of  his 
threats ;  and  CriptoSocinians,  who  deny  Christ's  vicarious 
satisfaction ;  are  forward  in  declaring,  that  it  affords  irrefra- 
gable evidence  of  the  absolute  eternity  of  the  sinner's  punish- 
ment, as  it  certainly  does  of  the  saints'  happiness.  At  the 
close  of  time,  when  nothing  but  eternity  remains,  the  Holy 
Spirit  says,  "He  that  is  unjust,  let  him  be  unjust  still:  and 
*'  he  that  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  «<^7/ :  and  he  that  is  righte- 
"  ous,  let  him  be  righteous  still:  and  he  that  is  holy,  let  him 
'*  be  holy  stilU^  In  these  four  cases,  the  word  still,  renders 
the  Greek  word  eti:  and  as  it  removes  all  limits  from  the 
continuance  of  the  saints'  holiness,  and  consequent  happiness ; 
so  it  does  from  the  sinner's  corruption  and  punishment. 

The  meaning  of  eti  being  thus  established,  it  is  not  at  all 
alarming  to  find  it  connected  with  oulam  by  a  conjunctions 
as  in  the  passage  cited  by  my  opponent  from  the  Septuagint 
of  Daniel.  The  conjunction  kai  is  found  in  the  Greek,  be- 
cause raw  is  found  in  the  Hebrew;  and  eti  is  found  in  the 
Greek,  because  od  is  in  the  Hebrew.  Oulam  and  od  are  justly 
rendered  ''*■  eis  ton  aiona  kai  eti,*'  by  the  Seventy,  and  '^''for 

p  In  iv.  55.  vii.  S3,  xli.  35.  xiv.  19.    xvi.  12.    Heb.  x.  37.    Rey.  vi.  11. 

q  Prov.  xxix.  14. 

V  Matt.  xix.  28.  Heb,  3ii.  28.  1  Cor.  ix=  25.  1  Pet.  v.  4.  Luke  xix.  17.  Rev.  i.  6, 


S76 

ever  and  ever,^'  by  onr  translators.  Neither  is  there  any  real 
discrepance  bttwoen  this  passage  of  the  Septuagint,  and  the 
original  of  Isa.  xlv.  17.  In  Isaiah,  oulami  governs  od,  and 
therefore  their  literal  rendering  is,  "eternities  of  futurity^  or 
eternities  of  endless  duration''  But  if  the  Septuagiut  had  in- 
serted a  conjunction,  and  rendei'ed  it,  *'eis  ton  aiona  kai  eli" 
this,  to  a  man  acquainted  with  the  language,  would  have  con- 
veyed the  same  sense,  and  rc(iuired  the  same  English  trans- 
lation. It  is  a  rule  which  often  holds  good,  that,  "  When 
*'  one  substantive  in  joined  to  another  by  a  copulative,  the 
"  one  must  be  translated  as  governing  the  other.''  This  rule 
is  quoted  from  an  authority  vvhicli  the  Universalists  cannot 
resist.  It  is  the  celebrated  Dr.  M'Knight.  As  this  great 
critic  was  a  renegado  Presbyterian,  with  more  learning  than 
piety,  and  more  zeal  for  his  own  honour,  than  for  the  Ark 
of  God,  he  must  of  course,  be  a  favourite  with  Mr.  Balfour, 
and  he  classed  with  Dr.  Campbell,  among  the  very  best  of 
ni'.n.  In  the  lJ)th  section  of  his  4th  Essay,  Preliminary  to 
his  translation  of  the  Apostolical  Epistles,  he  has  shewn  that 
the  above  rule  marks  a  feature  of  the  Hebrew,  Greek  and 
Latin  idioms.  If  this  be  correct,  then,  instead  of  inserting  a 
conjunction,  between  Isaiah's  two  nouns  which  are  in  govern- 
ment, we  shall  be  obliged  to  explain  Daniel's  conjunction, 
as  if  his  two  nouns  were  in  government.  His  ^^  oulam  and 
o</,"  or  his  "  eis  ton  aiona  kai  eti,^'  will  then  read,  "  to  the 
eternity  of  endless  duration,^*  or  which  is  the  same  thing, 
"  world  without  end.^^ 

It  is  evident  that  Dan.  xii.  8,  is  a  parallel  to  Isa.  xlv.  17. 
In  this  light  I  consider  it,  and  in  this  light  my  opponent  has 
quoted  it.  His  adducing  it  as  a  parallel,  has  one  aspect 
which  he  is  far  from  wishing  it  to  have.  Let  it  be  marked 
that  he  has  repeatedly  challenged  me  to  slievv  a  parallel  ex-r 
pression  connected  with  punishment  In  one  of  these  ban- 
ters, the  following  arc  his  words,  viz.  "  I  challenged  him  to 
"  shew  me  a  passage  where  the  same  phrase  is  used  with  re- 
"  ference  to  punishment,  as  is  used  in  Isa.  xlv.  17,  and  which 
"  is  rendered  in  the  common  version,  world  witlwut  end,  and 
*'  is  there  connecte<l  with,  and  brought  to  prove  F/rtRNAL 
<'  SALVATION  !  I  again  repeat  this  challenge  !  11  he  does,  or 
<'  can  shew  it,  he  has  the  argument ;  and  if  not,  the  argument 
<'  must  be  mine."s  Now  why  did  my  oj)ponent  endeavour  to 
force  into  Isaiah's  text,  the  conjunction  which  is  found  in 
Paniel's  only?  It  was  on  this  ground  and  this  alone,  that 

s  Minutee,p.  17t5. 


277 

the  '*  oulam  and  o</,"  in  Daniel,  was  precisely  equivalent  to 
the  oulami  od,  in  Isaiah.  If  he  did  not  mean  this,  then  he 
spoke  without  meaning,  and  he  shouhl  retract  his  reasoning, 
as  perfectly  nugatory.  But  I  have  admitted  and  proved, 
that  the  two  expressions  are  equivalent,  both  in  the  Hebrew 
and  the  Greek.  If  therefore,  either  expression  can  be  shewn 
in  connexion  with  punishment,  his  own  demands  are  com- 
plied with.  During  the  dinner  interval  of  the  discussion  to- 
day, a  friend  informed  me,  that  even  these  unfair,  restricted, 
and  peurile  conditions  could  be  complied  with.  Oulam  and 
od^  precisely  as  they  are  found  in  Daniel,  and  of  course,  as 
substantially  found  in  Isaiah,  you  will  see  connected  with 
punishment,  in  Ps.  ix.  5.  "  Thou  hast  rebuked  the  heathen, 
"  thou  ha,st  destroyed  the  wicked,  tliou  hast  put  out  their 
^  name  ybr  ever  and  ever,  or,  to  the  eternity  of  endless  dura- 
"  tion,  or  ivorld  without  end.*'  When  my  opponent  thought 
tha*  it  would  answer  his  purpose,  he  assumed  the  identity  of 
this  expression  with  that  in  Isaiah:  but  now  he  can  discover 
a  very  important  difference,  in  the  original  and  even  in  our 
translation.  I  know  not  how  to  reply  to  this  tergiversation, 
better  than  in  the  words  addressed  to  me  by  an  amiable  and 
pious  brother.  '*  I  was  happy  to  observe,"  said  he,  "  that 
"  you  had  compelled  your  adversary  to  rest  his  scheme  on 
"  the  difference  between  the  Hebrew  phrase  rendered,  world 
**  without  eiid^  and  that  translated, /ur  ever  and  ever.  May 
"  all  erroneous  systems  be  made  to  hang  as  publicly  upon 
'*  an  aiiy  nothing.^'' 

Anotlier  subterfuge  equally  claims  our  admiration.  He 
informs  us  that  even  if  tlieir  names  are  blotted  out  forever, 
yet  tlieii-  persons  may  be  saved,  and  have  a  "  new  name" 
given  them  But  if  a  man's  old  name  may  be  blotted  out, 
and  his  person  saved,  may  not  a  new  name  be  given  to  him, 
and  his  person  lost?  /Vnd  remember  that  the  text  not  only 
speaks  of  the  eternal  blasting  of  their  name  but  of  the  eter- 
nal perdition  of  tlieir  persons.  ''  Thou  hast  destroyed  the 
wicked,  thou  hast  put  out  out  their  name/oreyer  cnrf  ewer." 

But  my  opponent's  most  formidable  embankment  against 
this  inspired  artillery,  is  a  denial  that  this  text  relates  to 
futurity  at  all.  His  words  are  as  follows,  viz.  "  David 
*'  was  speaking  of  an  event  that  was  then  past,  and  which 
**  has  no  reference  to  a  future  state  of  existence."'^  The  only 
excuse  for  this  wresting  of  the  word  of  God,  is,  that  all  the 

tMiimtesp,  323, 


278 

verbs  in  the  text,  are  in  the  past  tense.  But  as  most  of  tlic 
prophecies  are  written  in  the  same  way,  this  mode  of  inter- 
pretation would  make  an  entire  revolution  in  all  our  views, 
Universalist  as  well  as  Orthodox.  Let  us  take  a  single  Uni- 
versalist  text,  and  try  it  by  this  rule.  "  And  every  creature 
"  which  is  in  Heaven,  and  on  the  earth,  and  under  the  earth, 
"  and  such  as  are  in  the  sea,  and  all  that  are  in  them,  heard  I 
"  saying,  blessing,  and  honour,  and  glory  and  power,  be  un- 
'*  to  him  that  sitteth  upon  the  throne,  and  unto  the  Lamb  for 
"  ever  and  ever.""  The  verb  in  this  prophecy  is  in  the  past 
tense.  Has  it  therefore  no  reference  to  futurity  ?  My  op* 
ponent  has  quoted  it  as  referring  to  eternal  futurity.  It  was 
future  to  the  writer;  though,  as  the  context  will  shew,  it  has 
already  been  fulfilled. 

But  if  David's  words  be  thus  interpreted,  in  order  to  favour 
the  wicked,  some  of  his  expressions  of  hope  for  his  own  sal- 
vation, must  be  explained  away.  Of  himself,  he  says,  "  He 
**  asked  life  of  thee,  and  thou  gavest  it  him,  even  length  of 
*'  da,jSf  forever  and  eufr."*  Oulam  and  or/ are  used  hereinc<m- 
nexion  with  life;  and  if  this  be  not  eternal  life^  I  doubt  wheth- 
er it  can  be  found  in  the  Scriptures.  Yet  the  promise  is 
conveyed  by  verbs  in  the  past  tense. 

Under  the  preceding  head,  the  most  of  those  passages  in 
which  oulam  and  od  occur  together,  were  postponed  to  this 
article.  In  addition  to  those  wliich  have  already  been 
quoted,  the  following  will  shew  that  if  these  words  do  not 
signify  absolute  eternity,  there  is  no  eternity  recognized  in 
the  Bible.  '*  We  will  walk  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  our 
God/or  ever  and  ever,""  *'  I  trust  in  the  mercy  of  God /or  ever 
and  ever.''''  '*I  will  bless  thy  name/or  ewer  anrf ewer.''  ♦'■  I  will 
praise  thy  name /or  ever  anrf  eucr."  "  Therefore  shall  the 
people  praise  thee /or  ever  and ^vcr."  "  For  this  God  is  our 
God  forever  and  ever.^^  The  works  of  God  *•  stand  fast /or 
ever  and  ever.''*  "The  Lord  is  King/oreuer  and  ever  ^  *'  The 
Lord  shall  rc\^\\  forever  and  ever.**  Now  if  the  faith  and  ho-; 
liness,  obedience,  happiness,  and  glory  of  the  saints;  and  if 
the  sovereignty  of  Jehovah,  be  eternal,  then  ontam  and  orf 
signify  eternal :  for  it  is  evident  that  the  duration,  and  the 
utmost  duration  of  these  things  was  here  intended. 

But  it  is  not  only  in  connexion  with  orfthat  oulam  has  this 
signification.     When  standing  alone,  it  sometimes  signifies 

u  Rev.  V.  I S. 
V  Ps.  xxi;  4. 
w  Jsa.  Ixiii;  16.     Ps.  xciii:  2.      x\\;  6. 


279 

eternity  past,  and  sometimes  eternity  to  come.  In  the  for- 
mer sense,  Isaiah  says  to  Jehovah,  "  Thy  name  is  from 
everlasting.'''  The  Psalmist  says,  "Thou  art  from  everlast- 
ing.'''' *'  Remember  0  Lord !  thy  tender  mercies  and  thy 
loving  kindnesses  j  for  they  have  been  ever  of  old.''* 

The  same  word  is  often  used  to  signify  eternity  past,  and 
repeated  in  the  same  sentence  to  mean  future  eternity. 
"From  everlasting  to  everlasting,  thou  art  God.''  "The  mercy 
of  God  is  from  everlasting  to  everlasting,  upon  them  that  fear 
him."  "  Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Israel,  from  everlasting 
to  everlasting.'"  "■  Blessed  be  thou,  the  Lord  God  of  Israel, 
our  Father,  from  everlasting  to  everlasting.^''  These  cxijres- 
sions  are  frequently  repeated.^  In  the  first  and  last  of  these 
examples,y  the  Septuagint  reads  *'  apo  tou  aionos  kui  heos  ton 
ainos.'^  In  the  second  of  them  the  Vulgate  reads,  "  ab  asferno 
et  usque  in seternum.'"'  In  tlie  two  last  it  reads  "  ab  aeternoin 
<c/c/'m<m,"  and  **  ab  ceterno  usque  in  ceterniim.*^  All  these  agree 
perfectly  with  our  translation,  and  with  the  Orthodox  view 
of  the  w  ord  oulam. 

As  this  word  occurs  in  most  of  the  texts  belonging  to  this 
branch  of  affirmative  evidence ;  and  as  niy  opponent  has  de- 
nied that  it  signifies  an  absolute  eternity ;  it  is  suitable  to 
produce  a  goodly  portion,  of  that  abundant  evidence  which 
the  Scriptures  contain  on  this  subject.  Oulam,  when  stand- 
ing alone,  is  one  of  the  most  usual  words,  whereby  the 
Spirit  of  God  conveys  the  doctrine  of  the  absolute  eternity  of 
the  saints' happiness.  Of  such  it  is  said,  "He  that  doeth 
these  things  shall  never  be  moved."  "  He  shall  never  suffer 
the  righteous  to  be  moved.''  "  Surely  he  shall  not  be  moved 
for  ever  J'"'  "  The  righteous  shall  never  be  moved."^  '*  And  the 
work  of  righteousness  siiall  be  peace ;  and  the  effect  of  right- 
eousness, quietness  and  assurance  forever.''''  '*  As  for  me, 
thou  upholdest  me  in  mine  integrity,  and  settest  me  before 
thy  face/oreuer."  **  He  shall  abide  before  God  forever.** 
"  Depart  from  evil,  and  do  good,  and  dwell  for  evermore: 
For  t!ie  Loi'd  loveth  judgment,  and  forsaketh  not  his  saints^ 
they  are  preserved  /or^i'er."  *'  The  Lord  shall  preserve  thy 
going  out  and  thy  coming  in,  from  this  time  forth,  and  even 
for  evermore.''''  "  The  Lord  is  round  about  liis  people,  from 
henceforth,  even /or  euer."  "For  thy  people  Israel,  didst 
thou  make  thine  own  people  forever.'*   *'  Let  Israel  hope  iit 

X  Ps.  xc;  2.    ciii:  17.     cvi;48.     xli;  13:     1  Chron.  xxix;  10.     xti;,"?^. 

y  As  an-anged  in  note  x. 

T  Ps,  XV;  5.     Iv;  22.     cxii;  6.     Prov,  T;  f^O- 


280 

the  Lord  from  henceforth,  and  forever.*\  '*  For  the  Lord 
will  not  cast  off /or  ever.''*  *'  Therefore  God  hath  blessed  thee 
forever."  **  Save  thy  people,  and  bless  thine  inheritance: 
feed  them  also,  and  lift  them  up  forever,'*''  *'  In  theeO  Lord  ! 
do  I  put  my  trust:  let  me  never  be  put  to  confusion."  "  My 
flesh  and  my  heart  faileth :  but  God  is  the  strength  of  my 
heart,  and  my  portion /oreuer."  "The  Lord  knoweth  the 
days  of  the  upright,  and  their  inheritance  shall  be/or  euer.''^ 
"My  salvation  shall  be/or  ever^  and  my  righteousness  shall 
not  be  abolished."  "  1  will  make  thee  an  eternal  excellen- 
cy." "  The  Lord  commanded  the  blessing,  even  life/oreuer- 
moreJ*  "  I  will  glorify  thy  name  for  evermore.''*  "  I  will 
praise  thee /oreuer."  "  So  we  thy  people  and  sheep  of  thy 
pasture,  will  give  thee  thanks/or  ever.**  '*  I  will  sing  of  the 
mercies  of  tlie  Lord /or  ever**  "  We  will  bless  the  Lord 
from  this  time  fortli  and /or  evermore.'*  *'  Let  all  those  that 
put  their  trust  in  thee  rejoice  :  let  them  ever  shout  for  joy, 
because  thou  defendest  them. '  "And  the  ransomed  of  the  Lord 
shall  return,  and  come  to  Zion  with  songs,  and  everlasting 
joy  upon  their  heads ;  they  shall  obtain  joy  and  gladness, 
and  sorrow  and  sighing  shall  flee  away."  "  Therefore  the 
redeemed  of  the  Lord  shall  return,  and  come  with  singing 
unto  Zion  ;  and  everlasting  joy  shall  be  upon  their  head  : 
they  shall  obtain  gladness  and  joy;  and  sorrow  and  mourn- 
ing shall  flee  away."  "  Everlasting  joy  shall  be  unto  them,"^ 
Several  of  these  quotations  will  be  readily  recognized,  as 
favourite  Universalist  texts,  to  prove  the  absolute  eternity 
of  the  happiness  of  all  those,  concerning  whom  these  passa- 
ges speak.  Such  an  interpretation  is  very  reasonable  indeed  : 
for  the  same  word,  which,  in  them,  communicates  the  eter- 
nity of  the  saints'  happiness,  does,  in  the  7th  anil  9th  verses 
of  the  24th  Psalm,  prove  the  eternity  of  Christ's  name  and 
kingdom,  and  of  that  heaven,  into  whose  uplifted  doors, 
the  divine  and  eternal  Head  of  the  Church  has  entered. 
"  Lift  up  your  head.  Oh  ye  gates !  and  be  ye  lifted  up,  ye 
everlasting  doors !  and  the  King  of  Glory  shall  come  in." 
And  now  that  he  is  in  heaven,  "his  name  shall  endure /or 
ever  ;**  and  his  kingdom  shall  endure,  "  from  henceforth, 
even /or  ever.**  a 


aPs.  37;18.    41;  12.    61;  7,    37;  27,28.     121;  8.     125;  2.     1  Chr.   17; 
Ps   131" 3 

b  Lara.  3;  31.     Ps.  45;  2.     28;  9.     71;  1.     73;  26.     37;  18. 

clsa.  51;6.     60;  15.     Ps.  I'i.JjS.      86;  12,    52;  9.    79;  13.     115;    18.     89; 
6;  n.     Isa.  35:10.     51:11.     Cl:7. 

fl  Ps.  72:  17.    J«a,  9:  7. 


281 

Those  lovers  of  truth,  who  have  patience  to  bear  a  fatigue? 
ing  dissertation  upon  an  important  word,  will  not  probably 
be  averse  to  my  producing  evidence  that  ouiam,  when  stand- 
ing alone,  is  used  with  great  familiarity  by  the  Holy  Spi- 
rit, to  signify  the  absolute  eternity  of  tlie  being  and  blessed- 
ness, perfections  and  purposes  of  the  one  uncreated  and  im- 
moi'tal  God. 

**  For  1  lift  uj)  my  hand  to  Heaven,  and  say,  I  live  for 
ever.*''  "  And  I  heard  the  man  clothed  in  linen,  which  was 
upon  the  waters  of  the  river,  when  he  held  up  his  right  hand 
and  his  left  hand  unto  heaven,  and  sware  by  him  that  liveth 
forever'''  "The  Lord  shall  endure /brt;i;er."  "Thou  0  Lord 
shalt  endure/orf?wr."  *'  Thou  O  Lord!  reraainest /brever."e 
**Thou  Lord,  art  Most  High,  for  evermore.'*  "And  Abraham 
planted  a  grove  in  Beei -sheba,  and  called  there  on  the  name 
of  the  Lord,  the  everlasting  God."  "  Hast  thou  not  known? 
hast  thou  not  heard,  that  the  everlasting  God,  the  Lord,  the 
Creator  of  the  ends  of  the  earth,  fainteth  not,  neither  is 
weary  ?"f  *'  This  is  my  name  forever.''*  "  Let  it  even  be  es- 
tablished, tliat  thy  name  may  be  magnified  for  ever."  "  Thy 
name,  0  Lord!  endureth/or  ever.''*  He  delivered  the  children 
of  Israel,  '*  dividing  the  water  before  them,  to  make  himself 
an  everlasting  name."s  <■  Let  thy  name  be  magnified/or  ever." 
**  And  blessed  be  his  glorious  jiame /or  ever.*''  "Blessed 
be  the  name  of  the  Lord  from  this  time  forth  and  for 
ever  more**  *'  Blessed  he  the  Lord  for  ever  more*^^  "  For 
erer,  O  Lord!  thy  word  is  settled  in  Heaven."  "  The  word 
of  our  God,  shall  stand /or  ever."  '*  The  counsel  of  the  Lord 
standeth  for  ever.**  "  The  righteousness  of  thy  testimonies  is 
everlasting.*'  "  Concerning  thy  testimonies,  L  have  known 
of  old,  that  thou  hast  founded  them /or  ever.'*  "Thy  word  is 
true,  from  the  beginning  ;  and  every  one  of  thy  righteous 
judgments  endureth /or  ewer."'  "The  Lord  shall  be  unto 
thee  an  everlasting  light:*'  "  thine  everlasting  light.'*  "  The 
glory  of  the  Lord  shall  endure  for  ever**  "  I  will  not  con- 
tend/or euer.''  "  Because  the  Lord  loved  Israel  for  ever.'* 
"  I  have  loved  thee  with  an  everlasting  love."j  *'  Under- 
neath are  the  everlasting  arms.'*  "  He  ruleth  by  his  power 
for  ever.'*    "  Thy  righteousness  is  an  everlasting  righteous- 

e  Deut.  xxxii.40.    Dan.  xii.  7.     Ps.  ix.  7. 102.  12.  Lam.  v.  19. 
f  Ps.  xcii.  8.  Gen.  xxi.  33.  Isa.  xl.  28. 
g  Ex.  iii.  15    1  Chr.  xvii.  24.   Ps.  cxxxt.  13.  Isa.  Ixiii.  12. 
h  2.  Sam.  vii.  26.  Fs   Ixxii.  19.  cxiii.  S.  89.  52. 
i  Ps.  cxix.  89.  l»a.  xl.  8.  Ps.  xxxiii.ll.  119.  osliv.  152.160. 
j.  Isa.  Ix,  19.  20,  Ps.  civ.  31.  Isa.  Ivii.  16. 1  Kgs.  x.  19.  Jer.  -^^ji  3. 

M  M 


288 

ness.*'  **  My  righteousness  shall  be /or  ever.  "  Which  keep- 
cth  truth  for  ever.'*  •'  The  truth  of  the  Lord  endureth  for 
ever.''*  "  Thou  shalt  keep  them  O  Lord!  thou  shalt  preserve 
them  from  this  g<>neration  for  ever."^  "  With  everlasting 
kindness,  will  I  have  mercy  on  thee."  "O  give  thanks  unto 
the  Lord;  for  he  is  good;  for  his  mercy  endureth  for  ever.'** 
The  eternity  of  God's  mercy  is  declared  in  very  many  in- 
stances, of  which  twenty-six  occur  in  one  Psalm.i.  In  ad- 
dition to  the  passage  lately  quoted,  pointing  out  the  eternity 
of  God's  sovereignty,  other  Scriptures  say,  ''  The  Lord  sit- 
teth  King  Jor  ever.*''  "  The  Lord  shall  reign  for  ever.**  "  He 
is  the  living  God,  and  an  everlasting  King."  "  His  kingdom 
is  an  evet  lasting  kingdom  :''  "  Whose  dominion  is  an  ever- 
lastinq  dominion."  "  His  dominion  is  an  everlasting  domi- 
nion :"  "  Whose  kingdom  is  an  everlasting  kingdom."m 

In  opposition  to  this  mass  of  evidence,  which  might  still 
be  enlarged,  my  opponent  would  urge  that  oulam  is  some- 
times used  for  a  limited  duration.  Yes  ;  it  is  often  used  in 
this  sense.  In  Exod.  xxi.  6,  and  elsewhere  it  signifies  the 
lengtli  of  a  man's  life.  "  He  shall  serve  him  forever :"  that 
is,  until  he  dies.  It  sometimes  means  the  duration  of  a  dis- 
pensation: as  in  Ex.  xxvii.  21,  "  It  shall  be  a  statute /or 
ever.*'  Or  Ex.  xl.  15,  *'  Their  anointing  shall  surely  be  an 
everlasting  priesthood.''  It  ^sometimes  signifies  the  duration 
of  the  earth  :  as  Habb.  iii.  6.  "  The  everlasting  mountains 
were  scattered,  the  perpetual  hills  did  bow."  Or  Eccles.  i. 
4.  "  One  generation  passeth  away,  and  another  generation 
Cometh,  but  the  earth  abideth  for  ever**  But  because  this 
word  is  sometimes  limited  to  the  Jewish  dispensation,  to  the 
life  of  man  on  earth,  or  to  Ihe  duration  of  the  earth  itself, 
shall  we  limit  it,  when  connected  with  God's  being  or  domi- 
nion, his  truth  or  justice,  his  love  or  mercy  ?  Universal ists 
themselves  often  give  it  an  unlinuted  sense,  when  the  ever' 
lasting  joy  of  the  saints  is  mentioned.  Foi  this  they  have 
good  reason:  but,  with  divine  assistance,  we  shall  sliew  that 
there  is  as  good  reason,  for  giving  it  an  unlimited  sense, 
when  the  everlastmg  punishment  of  the  wicked  is  affirmed. 

One  of  the  strongest  authorities  whicli  can  be  found,  in 
proof  of  the  eternal  happiness  of  the  saints,  is  Dan.  xii.2. 
But  this  passage  uses  the  same  word  o?//am,  in  the  same  sen- 
tence,  to  declare  also,  the  eternal  misery  of  the  wicked. 

k  Deut.  XXX.  27.  Ps.  Ixvi.  7.  cxix.  142.  Isa.  li.  8.  Ps.  cxlvi.  6.  cxvii.  2.  xii.  7. 

1  Isa.  liv.  8.  1  Clir.  xvi.  34,  41,  2  Chr.  v.  13.  vii,  3,  6.  xx.  21.  Ezra  iii.  11.  Ps. 
Ixxxix,  2.  28.  c.  5.  cvi.  h  cvii.  1.  cxviii.  4.  29.  cxxxviii.  8.  Jer.xxxiii.il.  Pa. 
cxxx%i.  1 — 26. 

m  Ps,  xxix.  10.  cxlvi.  10.  Jer,  x.  10.  Dan.  ir.  3,  34.  vii.  \i.  27. 


288 

**  And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall 
"  awake,  some  to  everlastint)  life,  and  some  to  shame  and 
**  everlasting  contempt."  This  text  speaks  of  the  general  re- 
surrection.  Now,  is  not  that  life  which  men  enjoy  after  that 
event,  absolutely  eternal?  If  so,  then  the  punishment  of  the 
wicked  is  absolutely  eternal:  for  the  duration  of  both  is  ex- 
pressed by  the  same  word,  without  any  reason  for  giving  it 
a  different  explanation.     In  both  instances,  all  limited  sig- 
nifications are  excluded  by  the  exigency  of  the  case.     In  this 
place,  oulam,  cannot  signify  the  duration  of  a  man's  mortal 
life;  because  all  mortal  lives  have  already  expired  ; — it  can- 
not mean  the  Jewish,  or  any  other  c  arthly  dispensation  ;  be- 
cause all  are  then  abrogated  ; — neither  can  it  denote  the  du- 
ration of  the  earth's  existence :  for  this  resurrection  takes 
place,  after  time,  with  all  its  divisions,  sliall  have  been  buried 
in  "the  wreck  of  matter,  and  the  cru.sh  of  worlds."  "Yet 
"  once  more,  I  shake  not  the  earth  only,  but  also  Jieaven. 
"  And  this  word,  yet  once  more,  signifieth  the  removing  of 
'*  those  things  which  are  shaken,  as  of  things  that  are  made, 
"  that  those  things  which  cannot  he  shaken  may  remain. "a 
If  this  text  relate  to  the  general  resurrection,  which  even 
Manasseh  Ben  Israel,  a  Jewish  writer,  admits,^  then  my  op- 
ponent sees  that  the  argument  drawn  from  it,  in  belialf  of 
future  rewards  and  punishments,  is  unanswerable.  He  there- 
fore denies  its  application  to  that  important  event.     He  de- 
nies that  it  speaks  of  all  mankind  awaking  from  their  long 
sleep,  but  only  a  part.     It  does  not  say,  "all  of  tiieni  that 
sleep,''  but  "  matiy  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth 
shall  awake  "  In  this  restricted  explanation  of  the  woi-d  ma- 
ny, he  considers  himself  supported  by  the  Septnagint,  which 
gives  the  word  poUoi,  witliout  the  article.     He  insists  upon 
it,  thsd  polloi,  Without  the  article,  never  signifies  the  whole 
human  race ;  whereas,  with  the  article,  it  does  necessarily 
signify  all  men  universally.  This  latter  position  he  took  long 
ago,  in  his  comment  on  Romans,  vth.  On  the  same  cliap^er. 
Dr.  Chauncey  took  the  same  ground.    His  great  antagonist 
duly  exposed  him.     If  this  criticism  be  true,  then  Paul  has 
pronounced  alt  men  false  teachers :  for  he  says,  "  We  are 
"  not  as  many,  HOi  polloi,  which  corrupt  the  word  of  God." 
Besides  this  passage,  Edwards  refers  to  evevy  one  in  the 
New  Testament,  in  which,  pol us,  in  the  plural,  is  used  with 
the  article ;  and  declares,  "  that  in  no  one  of  them  is  a  strict 

n  Heb.  x'.i  26,  27. 

o  See  Poole's  Annotations  oh  the  place. 


2d4 

universality  clearly  intended."?  He  might  have  added,  that 
classical  usage  coincides  with  that  of  the  New  Testament. 
Instances  are  accessible,  in  which  Socrates,  Plato,  and  Plu- 
tarclj,used  hoipoUoi,  to  signify  only  the  generality  of  their 
conteinporai  ies  and  predecessors,  with  whose  opinions  they 
were  acquainted  q 

But  it  is  rather  gratifying  than  alarming,  that  my  oppo- 
nent hasatlast  discovered  that /?o//oJ,  even  without  the  arti- 
cle, does  not  embrace  the  whole  human  family.  While  he 
does  this,  lioping  to  deprive  me  of  one  authority,  he  is  not 
perhaps  aware,  that  he  is  entirely  relinquishing  many  of  his 
own  favourite  texts.  Every  one  knows  the  Universalist  ex- 
planation of  Heb  ii.  9,  10.  Inthelastof  these  verses,  Christ 
is  represented  as  "  bringing  tnany  sons  unto  glory."  Here 
is  no  article  in  the  Greek ;  and  of  course,  according  to  my 
opponent's  criticism,  these  many  sons  whom  the  Saviour 
brings  to  glory,  are  only  a  part  of  mankind.  This  is  plain 
truth.  When  Christ's  blood  is  said  to  be  "  shed  for  many  j" 
and  when  he  is  said  to  "give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many  i** 
and  "to  bear  the  sins  of  »<any,'' (expressions  often  occur- 
ring,)'" my  opponent  formerly  said,  that  he  was  thus  held  forth 
as  the  Saviour  of  all  universally.  But  now  he  must  give  up 
these  texts,  for  in  all  of  them,  the  many  is  without  the  arti- 
cle, and  must,  of  course,  mean  only  a  part  of  mankind.  The 
Universalists  claim  in  support  of  their  doctrine,  the  promise 
quoted  in  Rom.  iv.  17.  ♦'  I  have  made  thee  a  father  of  many 
nations"  But  this  also,  they  must  give  up,  both  here,  and  in 
the  Septuagint  of  Gen.  xvii.  5,  in  both  of  which  places  the 
many  is  without  the  article.  Isaiah  says,  *'By  his  knowledge 
shall  my  rigJitcous  Servant  justify  7nany,^'  "  and  he  bare  the 
sins  of  manyP^  Tliese  passages,  my  opponent  has  quoted  in 
favour  of  uriiversal  salvation.  Y  et  that  Septuagint,  to  which 
he  has  appealed  in  Dan.  xii.  2,  has  no  article  in  either  of 
these  places.  The  !Oth  verse  of  this  same  xiith  chapter  of 
Daniel,  affoi'ds  another  instance,  in  which,  many,  without 
the  article,  cannot  mean  all  men.  It  says,  "*Many  shall  he 
purified  and  made  white,  and  tried."  Now,  that  a//  shall  not 
be  purified,  is  evident  from  the  whole  Bible,  and  even  from 
the  latter  part  of  this  same  verse  j  which  says,  "  but  the 


p  Edwards  agnin&t  Chauiicey,  pp.  ICl,  IC2.    Matt.  xvAv.  12,     Acts  xxvi.  24 
Koni.  xii.  5    XV.  22.  1  (Jor.  i.  17,  3.i.  2  Cor.  ii.  17.  Rev.  vvii.  1. 
q  Lelaiid's  Advanfafjc  and  Necessity,  vol.  2,  pp.  139, 3if  3,  391. 
r  Mk.  xiv.  24.  x.  45,  Matt.  xx.  2».  xxvi. '2S.  Heb.  ix.    8. 
s  Isa,  liii   11,  12. 


28& 

**  wicked  shall  do  wickedly ;  and  none  of  the  wicked  shall 
**  uniler.tund ;  but  the  wise  shall  understand." 

The  success  of  my  opponent  in  limiting  the  anartlirous 
poUoi  to  a  part  of  mankind,  is  calculated  to  remind  one  of 
the  battle  in  which  Pyrrhus  beat  the  Romans.  After  viewing 
the  shattered  remains  of  his  army,  he  observed  tbat  one 
more  such  victory  would  ruin  him.  It  is  evident,  that  by  his 
criticism  on  one  text,  he  has  criticised  himself  out  of  nearly 
a  dozen  of  his  (;bief  reliances.  And  what  has  he  gained  in 
return  ?  Has  he  proved  that  the  text  in  question  does  not  re- 
late to  the  resurrection  ?  This  is  far  from  being  a  legitimate 
consequence  of  his  premises.  The  word  many  may  signify  a 
part,  and  yet  it  may  be  said  of  that  part,  tliatthey  shall  rise 
again.  This  is  not  unsupported  theory ;  it  is  based  upon 
inspired  authority.  Concerning  the  new-born  Saviour,  Si- 
meon says,  "  Behold  this  Child  is  set  for  the  fall  and  rising 
again  of  many  in  Israel.*'  Here  the  word  many  is  without  the 
article,  and  the  text  limits  its  application.  Yet  in  the  origi- 
nal, it  is  governed  by  the  word  signifying  resurrection.^  Upon 
a  comparison  of  Isa.  viii  14,  to  which  this  alludes,  with 
Rom.  ix.  32,  33,  where  the  Prophet  is  quoted  and  expound- 
ed, it  will  be  found  that  this  rising  again^  mentioned  by  Si- 
meon, embraces  the  regeneration  of  the  soul,  and  the  resur- 
rection of  the  body,  both  of  which  belong  to  that  salvation 
which  Christ  came  to  communicate  to  many.  But  while  he 
is  a  savour  of  life  to  some,  he  is  a  savour  of  death  to  others. 
While  he  is  set  for  the  rising  again  of  many,  he  is  set  for  the 
fall  of  many.  And  the  texts  just  now  referred  to,  with  other 
scriptures,  will  -  shew,  that  these  two  manies^  are  entirely 
distinct  from  each  other;  quite  as  distinct  as  the  sheep  and 
the  goats.  The  passage  is,  like  tliat  in  Daniel,  evidently 
elliptical.  The  meaning  of  it  is  plainly  thisj  thai  many  Jews 
would  aggravate  their  condemnation  by  rejecting  Christ, 
and  many  Jews  should  be  saved  through  faith  in  his  blood. 
In  the  original  and  the  Septuagint  of  Daniel,  these  two  classes 
are  distributed,  by  words  corresponding  with  the  English 
these  and  those.'^  The  meaniug  of  the  passage  is,  that,  many 
of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall  awake  to 
everlasting  life,  and  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of 
the  earth  shall  awake  to  shame  and  everlasting  contempt. 
Mk.  x.  31,  is  another  example  of  an  elliptical  sentence,  in 

^  ava<a(J'iv  flroXXwv.  Luke  n.  84. 


which  polloi  occurs  once,  without  the  article;  yet  is  evidently 
intended  to  mark  two  classes,  in  each  of  which,  there  arc 
»wa«»/ individuals.  The  literal  translation  is,  ''But  many 
shall  be  first  last :  and  the  last  first.''  Here  one  many  is  ex- 
pressed, but  a  second  many  is  evidently  implied.  The  mean- 
ing therefore  is,  that  many  who  are  first  shall  be  last,  and 
many  who  are  last  shall  be  first.  The  conclusion  of  the  mat- 
ter is,  that  my  opponent's  criticism  has  cost  him  much,  and 
gained  him  nothing.  It  still  holds  good,  tliat  Dan.  xii.  2, 
consigns  some  to  everlasting  punishment,  after  all  the  limited 
periods  of  time  have  expired,  and  nothing  but  absolute  eter- 
nity remains. 

All  those  doctrinal  parallels  which  relate  to  the  resurrec- 
tion, confirm  the  doctrine  which  is  here  taught.  And  let  it 
be  recollected  that  both  parties  agree  in  the  propriety  of  re- 
sorting to  such  evidence.  Mr.  Balfour  says  "that  whatever 
"  difficulty  there  may  be  in  explaining  the  peculiar  phraseol- 
"  ogy  of  this  passage,  it  is  an  allowed  rule  of  interpretation, 
**  that  an  obscure  passage  ought  to  be  explained  by  those 
"  which  are  plain,  where  the  same  or  similar  subject  istreat- 
**  ed  of."v  As  he  and  his  Unitarian  brethren  believe  the  resur- 
rection of  the  body,  to  be  the  great  doctrine,  for  the  esta- 
blishment of  which,  the  New  Testament  was  written,  they 
ought  to  allow  that  it  contains  clear  information  on  this  sub- 
j<'ct:  and  if  they  object  to  any  light  which  may  be  drawn 
from  the  Old  Testament,  it  is  tlieir  own  fault ;  especially  as 
my  opponent  has  appealed  to  that  authority,  on  this  very- 
subject.  The  passage  is,  Isa.  xxv.  8.  "  He  will  swallow  up 
*'  death  in  victory ;  and  tlie  Lord  God  will  wipe  away  tears 
"  from  otf  all  faces;  and  the  rebuke  of  his  people  shall  he 
**  take  away  from  off  all  the  earth :  for  the  Lord  hath  spoken 
*'  it."w  His  argument  from  this  passage  depends  ujion  a 
misinterpretation  of  the  word  all.  IMiat  this  word  is  gene- 
rally used  in  a  limited  signification,  was  abundantly  proved 
in  my  9th  and  10th  Universalist  jlrffumenis.  This  passage 
contains  inherent  evidence  that  they  are  so  used  here.  It 
says,  *'the  rebuke  of  his  people  shall  he  take  away  from  off 
all  the  earth.''  Now  "  al/  the  earth"  here,  is  so  far  from  em- 
bracing all  men  universally,  that  it  excludes  all  the  people 
of  God,  whom  the  ])eople  of  the  earth  rebuke,  slander,  and 
persecute.    *'  The  reproach  and  contempt  which  m  as  daily 


V  Note  A ,  at  the  close  of  his  work. 
w  Minutes,  p.  12'i. 


287 

"  cast  upon  his  faithful  people  hy  the  ungodly  worl(l,"K  God 
has  promised  to  take  away.  In  doing  this,  he  will  wipe  away 
tears  from  off  all  faces ;  that  is,  from  all  the  faces  of  "  his 
people,*^  to  whom  the  next  clause  of  the  verse  expressly  ap- 
propriates the  promise.  Thus,  the  first  ali  in  the  text,  signi- 
fies the  people  of  God,  who  endure  great  contempt  before  the 
resurrectittn,  but  whose  rebuke  is  followed  by  eternal  con- 
solation, after  the  resurrection.  The  second  all  signifies  the 
people  of  the  world,  who  rebuke  and  contemn  the  righteous, 
before  the  resurrection,  but  who  shall  tiiemselves,  awake 
from  the  dust  of  the  earth,  to  an  inheritance  of  "shame  and 
everlasting  contempt."  With  reference  to  this  passage,  Paul 
uses  the  word  all,  in  the  same  restricted  sense,  in  1  Cor.  xv. 
51,  quoted  by  my  opponent. 

If  while  appealing  to  Isaiah,  my  opponent  had  examined 
the  19th  verse  of  the  next  chapter,  (xxvith,)  he  would  have 
found  the  Spirit  of  Christ  promising  a  happy  resurrection,  to 
none  but  the  members  of  his  mystical  body  ;  those  who  have 
a  covenant  interest  in  his  death  and  resurrection.  <'  Thy 
**  dead  men  shall  live,  together  with  my  dead  body  shall  they 
**  arise."  With  this  Paul  agreed,  when  he  preaclied  unto 
them,  Jesus  and  the  resurrection.  Also  Peter  and  John, 
when  they  '•  preached,  tlirough  Jesus,  the  resurrection  from 
the  dead."  Christ  himself  restricts  tlie  blessings  of  a  happy 
resui-rection  to  those  whom  the  Father  had  given  him,  and 
wliom  he  emphatically  distinguishes  from  the  unbelieving 
world.  .«  And  this  is  the  Father's  will  which  hath  sent  me, 
*'  that  of  all  which  he  hath  given  me,  I  should  lose  nothing, 
'*  but  should  raise  it  up  again  at  the  last  day."  He  confines 
it  to  those  whom  the  Father  draws  by  his  grace.  "  No  man 
**  can  come  to  me,  except  the  Father  which  hath  sent  me, 
**  draw  him ;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day."  Paul 
confines  it  to  those  who  have  the  Spirit  of  God  dwelling  in 
them  ,•  and  all  men  have  not  the  Spirit.  "  But  if  the  Spirit 
*'  of  him  that  raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead,  dwell  in  you,  he 
•*  that  raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead,  shall  also  quicken 
*'  your  mortal  bodies,  by  his  Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  you." 
Christ  restricts  it  to  those  who  eat  and  drink  his  flesh  and 
blood.  "Whoso  eatefh  my  flesh  and  drink  eih  my  blood,  hath 
**  eternal  life,  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day."  Paul 
confines  it  to  those  who  trust  in  God.  •'  But  we  had  the  sen- 
*'  tence  of  death  in  ourselves,  that  we  should  not  trust  in 

X  Poolt's  Annotations; 


288 

"  ourselves,  but  in  God,  which  raiseth  the  dead.*'  Thus  doeis 
our  Lord  confine  it  to  believers.  "  And  this  is  the  will  of  him 
"  that  sent  me ;  that  every  one  which  seeth  the  Son,  and  be- 
•*  lieveth  on  him,  may  have  everlasting  life,  and  I  will  raise 
"  him  up  at  the  last  day."  '*  Jesus  said  unto  her,  I  am  the 
'*  resurrection  and  the  life  :  he  that  believeth  in  me,  though 
"  he  were  dead,  yet  shali  he  live."  Paul,  in  the  19th  verse  of 
this  xvth  chapter  of  1st  Corinthians,  quoted  by  my  oppo- 
nent, has  appropriated  this  blessing  to  those  who  have  Chris- 
tian hope,  and  in  another  Epistle,  to  the  saints  who  sleep  in 
Jesus.  *  If  in  this  life  only  we  have  hope  in  Christ,  we  are 
"  of  all  men,  most  miserable."  "  For  if  we  believe  that  Jesus 
**  died  and  rose  again,  even  so  them  also  whichsleep  in  JesuSy 
^'  will  God  bring  with  him."  When  John  tells  us  that  "the 
"  sea  gave  up  the  dead  which  were  in  it,  and  death  and  hell 
"  delivered  up  the  dead  which  were  in  them,"  he  does  not 
add.  as  my  opponent  would,  that  all  were  received  into  hea- 
ven, but  '*  whosoever  was  not  found  written  in  the  book  of 
lile,  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire.'*  Concerning  the  fate  of 
these  impenitent  evil-doers,  our  Saviour  says  the  same  thing, 
while  he  confines  the  blessings  of  a  happy  resurrection,  to 
tijose  who  have,  through  grace,  do!te  good.  ''  Marvel  not  at 
'•  this,  for  the  hour  is  coming,  in  the  which  all  that  are  in  the 
«  grave,  shall  hear  his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth,  they  that 
*'  have  done  good^  unto  the  resurrection  of  life,  and  they  that 
"  have  done  evil,  unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation. '*y 

From  these  authorities  it  appears  plain,  that  the  inestima- 
ble blessing  of  a  resurrection  to  life,  mentioned  in  Dan.  xii. 
2,  is  not  bestowed  upon  all  men  universally,  but  only  on  thoso 
who  are  given  to  Christ,  and  are  written  in  the  Lamb's  book 
of  life ;  those  who  die  and  rise  in  Christ,  and  are  drawn  to 
him  by  the  Fatlier,  and  have  his  Spirit  dwelling  in  them; 
those  who,  by  faith,  eat  and  drink  his  body  and  blood  ;  those 
who  believe,  hope,  and  trust  in  him  ;  and  those  who  do  good 
and  sleep  in  Christ.  These  have  a  resurrection  to  life,  and 
shall  drink  of  the  river  of  the  water  of  life.  But  there  are 
others  who  are  not  given  to  Christ,  nor  drawn  to  him ;  who 
do  not  receive  him  nor  his  Spirit;  who  do  not  believe  nor 
obey  him.  These  are  said  to  have  a  '*  resurrection  of  dam- 
nation,*' and  to  be  "  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire."  In  the  light 
of  these  scriptures  who  can  he  at  a  loss  for  Daniel's  mean- 

y  Acts  xvii.  18.  iv.  2.   .lohn  vi.  39,  44.  Rom.  viii.  11.  John  vl.  54.    2  Cor.  i.  9. 
.^ohn  vi.40.  xi.  24—26,  1  Cor.  xv.  19.  1  Tljess.  iv.  14.  Rev.  ix.  13, 15.  JoIiqt.' 

J8.29, 


289 

ing?  "And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth 
**  shall  awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame 
**  and  everlasting  contempt.''  And  what  unpiejudiced  per- 
son can  help  seeing,  that  as  this  happiness  of  believers,  and 
this  misei'y  of  unbelievers,  are  declaimed  to  be  eternal,  after 
the  resurrection,  vvhen  time  is  at  an  end,  they  must  both  be 
absolutel*/  eternal7 

The  Divine  Head  of  the  Church  has  now  enabled  me,  as 
he  has  very  many  before  me,  to  produce  evidence  that  0M/a//i 
often  signifies  eternal^  whether  alone  or  in  conjunction  with 
od.,  and  always  has  this  meaning,  when  in  connexion  with 
the  happiness  of  the  saints,  or  the  misery  of  the  wicked.z 
Tliis  decides  the  application  of  many  of  those  texts,  which 
were  read  in  the  commencement  of  this  2d  branch  of  affir- 
mative evidence.  "  Thou  shalt  be  cut  off /or  ever.""  *'  And 
*'  they  shall  call  them  the  border  of  wickedness,  the  people 
**  against  whomtlie  Lord  hath  indignation  for  ever.^*  "  Their 
ever iastincf  confusion  shall  not  be  forgotten."  "And  I  ivill 
"  bring  an  everlasting  reproach  upon  you,  and  a  perpetual 
*' shame,  which  shall  not  be  forgotten."  "  They  perish ybr 
*'  ever,  without  any  regarding  it."  "Thou  pre  vail  est /or  eu«r 
"  against  him."  *'  He  put  them  to  a  perpetual  reproach." 
"  Let  them  be  confounded  and  troubled  for  ever ;  yea,  let 
"  them  be  put  to  shame  and  perish."  "  They  .shall  never  vsee 
"  light.''  "  Thou  hast  rebuked  the  heathen  ,•  thou  hast  de- 
*'  stroyed  the  wicked ;  thou  hast  put  out  tiieir  name  for  ever 
**  and  ever.*'' 

It  was  shewn,  that  after  the  "  resurrection  of  damnation," 
the  resurrection  "  to  shame  and  everlasting  contempt,"  which 
is  the  doom  of  unbelievers,  they  are  to  be  "  cast  into  the  lake 
of  fire.''  Several  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  declare  that 
this  fire  is  oulam,  absolutely  eternal:  and  although,  to  the 

z  That  o!a?n  signifies  an  absolute  eternity,  is  confirmed  by  the  collateral  evidence 
of  those  parts  of  the  Old  Testanieot  whicli  were  originally  writttn,  not  in  Hebrew, 
but  in  (Jhaldee,  which  is  nearly  related  to  it.  In  them  it  is  said,  "  I  blessed  the  Most 
"  High,  and  I  praised  and  honoured  him  that  Vweth  forever."  "  He  is  the  living 
"  God,  and  stedfast /orewr."  "  Blessed  be  the  name  of  (lod,  from  everlasting 
"  to  ever lastiji^."  His  kingdom  "  shall  never  be  destroyed,"  but,  "  shall  stand 
"  forever."  "  But  the  saints  of  the  Moit  High  shall  take  the  kingdom,  aniJ'possess 
^'  the  kingdom  forever,  e\en  forever  and  ever."  Instead  of  the  Hebrew  QSI^ 
or  D'J37li^  these  passages  have  the  con-esponding  Chaldaic  words  {|<J3'7J^ 

I'O'^i?  »nd  }>{'^7^.    The  meaning  is  clearly  made  out  by  the  maimer  in 
which  they  are  used.     Dan.  iv.  J4.  vi.  26,  it.  20,  44,  twice,  vii.  18. 

N  N 


290 

careless  and  whole-hearted,  it  may,  for  a  while,  he  a  subject 
of  mockery,  the  time  is  coming,  when  those  verv  persons, 
whether  professing  religion,  or  avowedly  opposing  it,  shall 
he  seized  with  a  fearful  apprehension  of  its  dreadful  reality. 
'*  The  sinners  in  Zion  are  afraid ;  fcai'fulnesshath  surprised 
'*  the  hypocrites.  Who  among  us  shall  dwell  with  the  de- 
"  vouring  fii'e  ?  Who  among  us  shall  dwell  with  everlasting 
"•  burnings  ?"  "  It  shall  not  be  quenched  night  nor  day ;  the 
"  smoke  thereof  shall  go  up /or  ever."  '■'  For  ye  have  kindled 
"  a  fire  in  mine  anger  which  shall  burn  /ot  ever.''''  A  con- 
scientious conviction  that  this  is  the  truth  of  God,  and  that 
it  is  your  interest  to  know  it,  makes  me  willing  and  even 
anxious  to  declare  it  to  you ;  with  a  hope  that  my  labour  shall 
not  be  in  vain  in  the  Lord;  but  'hat  your  souls  may  be  en- 
lightened as  well  as  alarmed  ;  that  they  may  be  sanctified, 
comforted,  and  saved,  through  the  grace  of  God  in  Jesus 
Christ. 

4. 

AlOm 

This  word,  in  the  New  Testament,  has  three  meanings  ; 
eternity  past,  eternity  to  come,  and  a  limited  duration. 

1.  A  (iinited  duration'  It  signifies  the  revolutions  of  time, 
the  dispensations  of  Providence,  the  great  and  important  pe- 
riods in  ti»c  history  of  mankind ;  this  world,  with  its  wisdom 
and  power,  riches  and  honoui's,  course,  cares,  and  concerns. 
In  this  sense,  it  oc(;urs  thirty- one  times.  The  particular 
places  are  n<»w  before  me,  but  need  not  be  read.a  These 
seons^  or  «r/e.s,  or  worlds.,  had  a  beginning.  "  As  he  spake  bj 
"  the  mouth  of  his  holy  propliets,  since  the  world  beyan.'*''^ 
Tijey  also  have  an  end.  *'  The  harvest  is  the  end  of  the 
world. "c 

2.  Eternity  past.  One  would  expect  the  New  Testament 
writers  to  use  it  fin*  an  absolute  eternity^  as  they  wrote  for  the 
Gi-eeks  who  attached  this  meaning  to  it;— as  they  generally 
spoke  after  the  manner  of  the  Septuagint; — and  as  Christian 
antiquity  understood  them  to  use  the  word  in  this  sense. 

a  Matt.  xJi.  32.  xiii.  22,  39,  40,  49.  xxiv.  3.  xxviii.  20.  Mk.  iv.  19.  Luke  i.  70. 
xvi.  8.  XX.  34.  Actsiii.  21.  Horn.  xii.  12.  I  Cor.  i.  20,  twice,  ii.  6,  twice,  ii.  8,  iii. 
IS  X.  11.  2Coi-.  iv.4.  Gal.  i.  4.  Eph.  i.  21.  ii.  2.  vi.  12.  1  Tim.  vi.  17.  2  Tim.  iv. 
10.  Tit.  ii.  12.  Ileb.  i.  2.    is.  26.  xi.  .3. 

'^  c.-n-'afwvo?:.  Luke  i.  70.  Acts  iii.  21. 

*^  ffoVTS'Ksta  Tou  Muvoi.  Matt.  xiii.  39,  19.  xxiv.  3.  xxviii.  20,  Hcb.ix.26.  * 
Coi'.  X.  11.  Ta  tjX->]  twv  aiMVC/jv, 


291 

Scapula  says,  that  a2on  is,  as  if  it  were  spoken  aien  on,  ^- 
ing  alxoays.  For  this  etymology  and  explication,  he  refers  to 
Aristotle  and  Philo,  b<ith  of  whom  declare  unequivocally, 
tliat  it  means  an  absolute  eternity.  An  examination  of  the 
Septuagint,  (with  which  the  Apostles  were  familial-,)  in  those 
passages  where  nejek^  od.  and  olam  signify  efei^nifi/,  will  soon 
shew  the  use  which  that  ancient  translation  made  of  this 
word;  and  we  liave  already  given  some  hints,  atul  may  yet 
give  others,  of  the  sense  in  which  the  Christian  fathers  un- 
derstood it.  That  they  were  right  in  their  views,  is  evident 
from  the  fact,  that  the  eternity  of  (iod's  being,  wisdom  and 
purposes  are  communicated  in  the  New  Testament,  by  tbis 
word.  In  the  use  of  aion^  Paul  ascribes  lionour  and  praise 
"  unto  the  King  eternal^  immortal,  invisible,  the  only  wise 
God.''  Here  the  first  word,  eternal^^  denotes  his  existence 
from  eternity,  and  tbe  second  word  iin  .tortal^  his  existence  to 
eternity.  Again;  "Known  unto  God,  are  all  his  works, 
from  the  beginning  of  the  world;"*"  that  is,  from  eter*nity,  for 
this  is  the  fact.  Again  ;  "  According  to  the  eternal  purpose 
"  which  he  purposed  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord."*  The  mean- 
ing of  our  translation  here,  cannot  easily  be  misunderstood. 
The  word  aion  is  translated  eternal.  Some  versions  are  not 
so  decided,  but  I  helieve  that  few  of  any  respectability,  op- 
pose this  rendering.  I  could  almost  promise  at  a  venture, 
that  if  my  opponent  woiild  open  and  quote  those  numerous 
versions,  about  which  he  has  been  so  pompously  boasting, 
they  would  be  all  in  our  favour.  The  Syriac  Testament  is 
MEN  OLEMA, /ro/rt  eternity.  With  this  agrees  the  French 
of  De  Sacy  ;  *-*■  avant  tons  les  temps,  before  all  times.'''  Beza's 
Latin  is  fBternum.  The  Spanish  is  eterna.,  and  the  Italian, 
eferno;  agreeing  with  our  eternal.  This  is  Doddridge's 
translation,  and  that  of  Archbishop  Newcome :  and  wonder- 
ful to  tell !  The  Socinians  have  copied  it  from  him,  in  their 
celebrated  Improved  Version :  although  Mackiiiglit  has  herd- 
ed with  Waiceficld,  and  Scarlett,  and  my  opponent,  in  taking 
a  different  view  of  the  text.  It  would  have  heen  well  for  the 
church,  if  he  had  never  polluted  a  better  communion, 

3.  Eternity  to  come.  Speaking  of  God,  Paul  says,  '*  Unto 
"  him  be  glory  in  the  church,  by  Christ  .lesus,  throughout 
'-'■  all  ages,  world  without  end,'*   Here Macknight  breaks  off 

'^  Twv  aiwvwv.   I  Tim.  i.  17. 

^  afl-'aiwvos.   Acts  xv.  18. 

f  i{Poh(ft\i  Twv  aiwvwv.   Eph,  iii.  11= 


292 

from  his  company,  and  renders  this  passage,  '■'■  throughout 
all  the  endless  successions  of  ages."  The  Improved  Version 
still  follows  Newcome,  and  renders  it,  "throughout  all  ge- 
nerations, for  ever  and  ever.^'s  Peter  says,  "  But  grow  in 
*'  grace,  and  in  the  knowledge  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour,  Je- 
**  sus  Christ  To  him  be  glory,  both  now  and  forever.''  So 
Newcome  and  the  Improved  Version.  Literally,  "both  now 
and  unto  the  day  of  eternity'^  as  Macknight  ren«lers  it.  Here 
Scarlett  and  my  opponent  are  left  out  of  sight.  To  those 
who  give  up  the  present  world  for  Christ,  he  promises,  '*  in 
the  ivorhi  to  come,  eternal  life."''  With  this,  the  Primate 
and  the  Improved  Veision  agree.  Instead  of  "in  the  world 
to  come,''  Campbell  says,  "in  the  future  state."  Here  also, 
Scarlett  and  my  opponent,  with  their  temporal  ages,  and 
aonian  limitations,  are  quite  forgotten. 

In  the  1st  sense  of  aion,  given  above,  it  is  proved  to  be 
sometimes  temporal.  But  under  the  present  head,  it  may  be 
shewn,  that  these  present  limited  aeons  are  expressly  con- 
trasted with  those  future  aeons,  which  are  unlimited. 
"  Whosoever  speaketh  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not  be 
forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world^  neither  in  the  world  to 
come.*''  The  word  tvurd,  in  this  text,  is  aion,  in  the  original: 
and  if  this  world  mean  time,  it  is  evident  that  the  future  must 
mean  efeniiti/.  The  same  observation  will  hold,  with  re- 
gard to  what  Paul  says  about  the  exaltation  of  our  Divine 
Saviour,  "  far  above  all  principalities  and  powers,  and  might 
and  dominion,  and  every  name  that  is  named,  not  only  in  this 
world,  but  also  in  that  which  is  to  come."J  Not  only  are  the 
disputers,  wisdom,  and  rulers  of  this  world,  distinguished 
from  Clirist's  spiritual  kingdom  ;  not  only  are  the  children 
of  this  world  distinguished  from  the  children  of  light;  not 
only  do  the  scriptures  speak  of  "  this  present  world ;"  and 
*'  this  present  evil  worhi,""^  in  such  a  way  as  plainly  to  im- 
ply a  future  aion,  and  a  state  of  uninterrupted  happiness,  but 
they  expressly  point  out  a  future  aion,  or  eternity,  which  is 
in  heaven,  subsequent  to  the  general  resurrection ;  for  which 
we  should  make  present  provision,  and  which  we  should  hope 
to  enjoy,  through  grace,  after  the  present  aion,  the  present 
state  of  existence,  has  come  to  an  end.     *'  And  Jesus,  an- 

g  £ig  liadoii  Tag  y£v£as  tou  aiwvog  twv  aiwvwv.   Eph.  iii.  21. 

"  fv  Tw  c/.iwvi    TW  £^0(XSvu,  ^w>]v  aiwviov.    Mk.  x.  30.  Luke  xviiJ.  30. 

i  Mutt.  xii.  32. 

j  Eph,  i.  21. 

k  1  Cor.  1.  20.  ii.  6.  Luke  xi.  18.  2  Tim.  ir.  10.  Tit.  ii.  12, 


293 

<'  swering,  said  unto  them,  the  childrenlof  this  worWmarry  and 
"are  given  in  marriage;  but  they  which  shall  be  accounted 
"worthy  to  obtain  that  world  and  the  resurrection  ft  om  the 
**  dead,  neither  marry  nor  aie  given  in  marriage  ;  neither 
"  can  tliey  die  any  more  :  for  they  are  equal  unto  the  angels ; 
<*  and  are  the  children  of  God,  being  the  children  of  the  re- 
*<  surrection."  "  For  in  the  resurrection  they  neither  marry 
"  nor  are  given  in  marriage,  but  are  as  the  angels  of  God 
*'  in  heaven.^''  Here,  as  in  some  former  instances,  Campbell, 
Newcoine,  and  the  Improved  Version  agree  with  our  trans- 
lation; and  Scarlett  and  Crimson  are  left  in  a  company  by 
themselves.  The  same  fact  is  observed,  where  we  are  indi- 
rectly taught  to  care  about  the  eternal  world,  by  being  told 
that  "the  care  oUhis  world,''  is  sometimes pernicious.i 

In  the  above  passages  there  is  a  marked  distinction  between 
the  temporal  aion  and  the  eternal  aion.     In  this  aion^  people 
marry,  and  in  that  aion,  they  do  not.   This  aion  is  before  tlie 
resurrection,  that  aion  is  after  the  resurrection.  The  people 
of  this  aion  are  sinful  men  on  earth,  but  the  people  of  that 
aion,  are  "children  of  God,"  *' children  of  the  resurrection,'' 
'*  as  the  angels  of  God  in  heaven."  Thus,  at  the  end  of  this 
aion,  we  are  taught  that  God's  people,  (not  unbelievers,) 
shall  arise  to  that  aion,  an  eternity  of  happiness  in  heaven. 
AVith  respect  to  hypocrites  and  infidels,  Christ  says,  "  As, 
"  therefore,  the  tares  are  gathered  and  burned  in  the  fire,  so 
'<  shall  it  be  at  the  end  of  this  aion.     The  Son  of  man  shall 
"  send  forth  liis  angels,  and  they  shall  gather  out  of  his  king- 
'*  dom,  all  things  "that  offend,  and  them  which  do  iniquity  ; 
"  and  shall  cast  them  into  a  furnace  of  fire;  there  shall  be 
"  wailing  and  gnashing  of  teeth.     Then  shall  the  righteous 
"  shine  forth  as  the  sun  in  the  kingdom  of  their  Father.  Who 
*'  hath  ears  to  hear  let  him  hear.'™  This  furnace  of  fire  may 
allude  to  Tophet,  which  was  a  furnace  in  the  valley  of  Hin- 
nom,  or  it  may  allude  to  Nebuchadnezzar's  furnace  in  the 
plain  of  Dura ;  but  it  cannot  mean  either  of  these  places,  be- 
cause they  belong  to  this  world,  whereas  the  furnace  of  fire 
here  threatened,  is  after  "the end  of  this  world.''  Moreover, 
the  furnace  of  this  world  cannot  always  inflict  pain,  even 
when  heated  seven-fold  ;  whei-eas  in  the  furnace  of  fii-e  in  the 
eternal   world,  <' there  shall  be   wailing  and  gnashing  of 
teeth."  These  are  the  words  of  infinite  truth,  and  must  come 


1  Luke  XX  34—36.  Matt.  xxii.  30.  xiii.  22. 
TO  Matt.  xiii.  40 — i3. 


294 

to  pass :  therefore  let  no  one  permit  himself  to  be  deceived 
with  Tain  words. 

Enough  has  been  said  to  shew,  that  in  Classical,  Eccle- 
siastical, and  inspired  Gi'eek,  J/ow  means  an  endless  dura-- 
tion.  It  does  not  occur  in  its  absolute  form  in  any  of  the 
texts  adduced  under  the  second  branch  oi' affirmative  eyidence: 
yet  it  was  necessary  to  notice  it,  on  account  of  the  bold  and 
unjustifiable  assertions  of  the  enemies  of  truth,  and  on  account 
of  its  necessajy  connexion  with  the  5th  section,  where  it  is 
often  found  pteceded  by  a  preposition,  and  with  the  6th  sec- 
tioi^,  which  treats  of  an  adjective  derived  from  it. 

W  \ii]e  aiuii  has  been  before  us,  unusually  frequent  mention 
has  been  made  of  my  opponents  new  translation  of  the  New 
Testanierit,  together  with  the  iinproved  version,  and  that  of 
Mr.  Scarlett.  As  Lowth,  am!  Horsley,  and  Newcome,  and 
Campbell,  and  Macknigiit,  have  set  the  world  mad  about  new 
translations,  so  tiiat  every  one  must  be  engaged  in  it;  this 
will  perhaps,  be  as  convenient  an  opportunity,  as  I  shall  soon 
have  again,  to  give  some  easy  directions  for  getting  a  name 
in  this  way.  Although  you  may  not  know  whether  Greek  is 
read  from  right  to  left, or  from  left  to  right,  you  will  pi'ofess, 
of  course,  to  translate  *'  fiom  the  original  Greek  according 
"  to  Griesbach  ;  upon  the  basis  of  the  fourth  London  edition 
*'  of  the  Improved  Version,  with  an  attempt  fo  further  im- 
*'  provement  from  the  translations  of  others.  Then  sit 
doM  n  and  copy  Scarlett's  ti'anslation,  witli  a  number  of  un- 
meaning (and  therefore  safe)  transpositions  and  alterations 
of  words  and  plirases,  to  make  the  work  your  own.  Enclose 
many  words  and  sentences  here  and  there,  in  brackets,  to 
shew,  that  up(m  a  careful  comparison  of  manuscripts,  you, 
in  your  Judgment,  think  them  spurious.  Adorn  your  margin 
with  notes  from  the  Improved  ^'ersion.  Give  credit  for  some, 
to  shew  your  reading :  and  after  altering  a  word  or  two, 
give  others  as  your  own,  to  shew  youi*  learning.  Get  some 
printer  who  understands  Greek,  to  publish  the  work,  with 
Griesbach  in  one  column,  and  your  do«d)ly  improved  version 
in  the  other.  Send  a  copy  to  every  college  in  the  Union ,  and 
invite  all  the  clergy  and  literati  of  America  to  read  this  thing, 
and  to  send  you  their  remarks,  after  they  have  paid  the  post- 
age. As  they  will  probably  be  weak  enough  to  consider 
you,  as  Nabal  did  David,  a  servant  broken  away  from  his 
master,  they  will,  of  course,  take  no  notice  of  this  invitation. 
Then  publish,  that  they  are  silent,  because  they  do  not  con- 
sider the  work  susceptible  of  any  farther  improvement,  ex» 


295 

cept  from  its  vastly  improved  author.  After  this,  you  can 
institute  a  course  of  lectures  on  the  Greek  language,  and 
send  round  invitations  to  all  the  clergy  of  the  city,  to  attend 
and  be  enlightened.  They  will  n(»t  come;  but  thei.  places 
will  be  filieel  by  others,  wlio  will  think  you  the  greatest  pi'o- 
digy,  that  the  world  has  ever  seen,  since  tiie  tune  that  the 
image  fell  from  Jupiter. 

5. 
EISAIONA. 

This  is  the  phrase  which  is  usually  translated /or  ci;er; 
and  its  reduplicate,  eis  ious  aionous  ton  uionon^  is  usually  ren- 
dered,/or  ever  and  eveu  The  former  occurs  forty  times  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  the  Uitter,  twenty-one  times.n  Of  these 
sixty-one  instances,  six  relate  to  future  punishment.  These 
are  the  first  six  texts  quoted  from  the  New^  Testament,  at  the 
beginning  of  this  branch  of  o^VwjartW  evidence.  'I'he  sense  of 
tliese  phrases  in  these  particular  texts,  will  depend  much  upon 
the  signification  in  which  they  are  generally  used  by  the  New 
Testament  writers.  This  meaning  can  be  satisfactorily  as- 
certained, by  those  who  examine  the  passages,  whetiier  they 
understand  Greek  or  not.  We  sliall  tlierefore  lay  them  be- 
fore you,  in  theftdlowing  order. 

1.  In  seventeen  places,  it  expresses  the  duration  of  tlie  be- 
ing and  life,  the  perfections,  promises,  and  dominion  of  God. 
"  For  thine  is  the  kingdom,  and  the  power  and  the  glory 
"for  et'cr."  "The  Creator,  who  is  blessed /or  ever"  "Over 
<•'  all  God  blessed  for  euer."  "  To  whom  be  glory  for  ever  J' 
'*  Which  is  hXtHHO^A  for  ever  more.''  "•  To  whom  be  glory /or  ever 
"  and  ever.'''  *'Now  unto  God  and  our  Father,  be  glory /or 
^^  ever  and  ever.'''  "Be  honour  and  g\oiy  for  ever  and  ever." 
*'  To  whom  be  glory /or  ever  and  ever."  *'To  him  be  glory 
"and  dominion /or  etjeranrfeuer."  "For  the  truth's  sake 
"  which  dwelleth  in  us,  and  shall  be  with  us  for  ever."  "  He 
"  hath  holpen  his  servant  Israel,  in  remembrance  of  his  mer- 
"  cy,  as  he  spake  to  our  fathers,  to  Abraham  and  to  Jiis  seed 
'^^ forever."'  "The  word  of  God,  which  liveth  and  abideth 
<■' for  ever.''''  «' The  word  of  the  Lord  enciureth  forever.^' 
*'  Amen :  blessing,  and  glory,  and  wisdom,  and  thanksgiv- 
♦'  ing,  and  honour,  and  power,  and  might,  be  unto  our  God, 
^^  forever  and  ever,  Amen."  "  And  one  of  the  four  beasts,  gave 

n  Rev.  XX.  10.  Jude  7.  2  Tliess.  i.  9.  Matt,  xviii.  8.  Heb.  i.  8.  1  Pet.  v.  11  iv 
11.  Rev.  i.  18.  iv.  9,10.  v,  13,  14.  \ii.  12,  x.  6.  xJ.  15.  i.6.  xxii.  5.  xv.V.  xiv.' 
11.  xix.  3,   XX.  10. 


296 

**  unto  the  seven  angels,  seven  golden  vials,  full  of  the  wrath 
"of  God,  which  liveth  for  ever  and  ever.''  "  Thy  throne,  O 
**  God !  is  for  ever  and  ever,  "o 

It  may  be  reasonably  expected,  that  all  the  orthodox  agree 
with  our  translation,  in  these  passages.  Indeed  every  here- 
tic of  sense,  would,  out  of  regard  to  his  own  character,  agree 
with  it.  Accordingly,  that  detestable  abomination,  nick- 
named the  Improved  Version,  being  made  by  sensible  men, 
though  bitter  enemies  to  God,  has  coincided  with  our  trans- 
lation, in  the  renderir»g  of  tlie  phrases  in  question,  in  every 
one  of  the  above  texts  ,•  unless  the  first,  which  it  suppresses 
entirely,  and  another,  (i  Pet.  i.  28,)  in  which  they  have  ju- 
gulated this  phrase,  may  be  considered  exceptions.  In  the 
work  of  suppression,  my  opponent  follows  them  ;  for  this  is 
his  forte :  but  in  all  the  other  fifteen  texts,  he  follows  Scar- 
lett, his  old  guide,  in  giving  us,  to  the  age,  and  to  the  acjes  of 
ages,  instead  of ^br  ever,  and  yor  ever  and  ever.  His  acquain- 
tance with  the  Improved  Version  has  only  made  him  spoil 
Scarlett's  childish  translation  with  some  serious  perversions. 
If  they  had  told  us,  what  they  knew  to  be  the  fact  and  what 
Junius  and  Tremellius  have  told  us,  in  their  translation  of 
Dan.  xii.  3,  that  these  were  absolutely  eternal  ages,  SEMPI- 
TERNA  secula,  it  would  have  altered  the  case:  but  an  at- 
tempt to  criticise  away,  not  only  the  eternity  of  future  re- 
w  ards  and  punishments,  but  the  eternity  of  the  Creator  him- 
self, is  as  unreasonable  as  it  is  impious. 

2.  Two  of  the  above  texts,?  though  using  the  word  God, 
relate  evidently  to  Christ,  who  is  the  Supreme  God,  and  the 
eternal  Son  of  God,  as  declared  in  those  texts.  Twenty-one 
others  are  of  the  same  description.*!  One  more  is  spoken  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.^ 

3  It  occurs  nine  times  in  relation  to  the  saints.  "But 
'*  whoso  drinketh  of  the  watei'  I  shall  give  i)im  shall  7iever 
*'  thirst :  but  the  water  that  I  sliall  give  him,  shall  l«e  in  him 
*'  a  well  of  water  springing  up  unto  everlasting  life."  "  If 
"  any  man  eat  of  this  bread,  he  shall  live  forever.''  "  Verily, 
*'  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  if  a  man  keep  my  sayings,  he  shall 
''^  never  see  death;"    ''never  taste  death.''     *' i  give  unto 


o  Matt.  Ti.  13.  Rom.  i.  25.  ix.  5.  xi.  36  2  Cor.  xi.31.  Gal.  i.  5.  Phil.iv.  20, 
1  n  itn.i.  17  2  rim.  iv.  18.  iPet.v.ll.  2  Jokn  2.  Luke  i.  55.  1  Pet.  i.  23,  25. 
Rev.  vii.  12.  xr   7.    Heb.  i.  8. 

p  Rom.  ix.  5.  (ieb.  i.  8. 

q  Luke  i.  33.  Jnhn  vjii.  35.  xii.  34.  Rom.xvi.  27.  Heb.  v.  6.  vi.  20.  vii.  17,  21, 
24,  28.  xiii.  8,  21.  1  Pet.  iv.  11.  Rev.  i.  6,  18.  iv.  9,  10.  v.  13, 14.  x.  6.  xi.  15. 

r  John  xiv.  16. 


^  them  eternal  life,  and  they  shall  never  perish,  neither  shall 
"  any  pluck  them  out  of  my  hand  "  *'•  Whoso  liveth,  and  be- 
**  lieveth  in  me, shall  /leuerdie."  "His  righteousness  remain- 
"  eth  Jorever.  **  And  the  world  passeth  away,  and  the  lust 
'*  thereof;  but  he  that  doeth  the  will  of  God,  abidetb /oreuer.'* 
*' And  they  shall  reign  for  ever  and  ever.^^  Here,  as  before, 
Scarlett  confines  the  happiness  of  the  saints  to  an  age,  or 
ages,  and  my  opponent,  of  course,  follows  him,  in  every  in- 
stance. The  authors  of  the  Improved  Version  would  have 
been  glad  to  dotliesame:  but  they  had  sense  enough  to  keep 
from  exposing  themselves.  They,  therefore,  fell  in  with  the 
common  ti  anslation.s 

4.  There  are  six  instances  remaining  ;t  in  all  of  which  the 
Improved  Version  is  right,  in  the  translation  of  this  phrase, 
anJ  Scarlett  and  my  opponent  wrong,  as  before.  The  great 
improveujent  which  they  have  made,  by  rendering  eiS 
Aii'NA,  to  the  age,  may  be  in  some  measure  estimated,  by  a 
comparison  of  their  translation  with  ours,  in  one  of  these 
texts.  Our  bible  says,  "  The  servant  abideth  not  in  the  house 
^^  for  ever;  but  the  son  abideth  ever"  This  declaration  that 
*'  the  son  abideth  erer,"  "in  the  house,"  is  equivalent  to  Ps. 
xxiii.  6,  '*  Surely  goodness  and  mercy  shall  follow  me  all  the 
*'  days  of  ray  life;  and  I  will  dwell  in  the  house  of  the  Lord 
*^  for  ever;'  that  is  after  this  life  has  come  to  an  end.  But  it 
is  said  that  *'  the  servant  abideth  not  in  the  house  for  ever; 
that  is,  to  eternity :  for,  would  it  be  correct  to  say,  that  he 
dees  not  abide  in  the  house  during  this  life  ?  Is  it  not  a  com- 
mon thing,  for  hypocrites  to  live  and  die  in  the  visible 
churcli?  In  this  text,  thereiore.  eis  aiona  occurs  twice,  with 
an  unlimited  signification.  Now.  letushear  the  doubly  im- 
proved translation,  which  my  opponent  has  made,  for  th© 
benetit  of  the  unlearned.  "  And  the  slave  abideth  not  in  the 
'*  house  to  the  age:  but  the  son  abideth  to  the  age."  Among 
all  classes  of  the  community,  it  is  a  very  common  thing,  to 
talk  of  sons  being  of  age,  and  consequently  leaving  their  fa- 
ther s  house;  and  of  slaves  abiding  in  the  house  to  old  age 
and  death.  The  unlearned,  and  unsophisticated  reader  of 
my  opponent's  Version,  would  exclaim.  How  different  was 
the  custom  in  former  times,  from  that  which  now  prevails! 
Now  a  slave  abides  in  the  house  during  life  :  butin  old  timeSj^ 
he  did  not  continue  in  the  house,  even  until  he  was  of  age, 

s  John  iv.  14.  vi.  51,  58.  viii.  51.  52,  x.  28.  xi.  25.    2  Cor.  ix.  9.  1  John  u.  If. 
Rev.  xxii.5. 

t  John  viii.  35,  twic«.  1  Cor.  viii.  13.  John  xiii,  8.  Matt.  xxi.  19,  Mk.  si.  14» 

O  0 


This  is  about  as  much  of  an  improvement,  as  that  of  a  cer- 
tain expounder  who  ivad  begyur's  skius  for  badgei  s  skins,  in 
Ex.  xxvi.  14,  or  another  who  substituted  an  oyster-man  for 
an  auatere  rnan,  in  Luke  xix.  21. 

We  have  now  given  ail  the  passages  in  which  eis  aionee 
and  its  reduplicate  occur  in  the  NeM  Testament.  In  the 
scores  of  places,  in  which  it  marks  the  duration  of  the  being, 
perfections  and  sovereignty,  of  God,  and  of  Christ,  and  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  judge  ye,  whether  it  does  not  mean,  to  an 
absolute  eternity.  Among  the  few  places  in  which  it  relates 
to  other  subjects,  even  the  Improved  Version  cannot  sliew 
that  it  should  be  limited.  What,  then,  are  we  to  conclude, 
in  relation  to  those  six  passages,  in  which  it  is  connected 
with  future  punishments  "  He  that  shall  blasjdieme  against 
"  the  Holy  Ghost,  hath  never  forgiveness."  '*  These  are  wells 
"  without  water ;  clouds  they  are,  carried  w  ith  a  tempest,  to 
"  whom  the  mist  of  darkness  is  reserved  ybr  ever."  "  Raging 
"  waves  of  the  sea,  foaming  out  their  own  shame:  to  whom. 
"  is  reserved  the  blackness  of  darkness,  for  ever."  '•  And 
"  the  smoke  of  their  torment  asrendeth  up  /or  ever  andever: 
**  and  they  shall  have  no  rest,  day  nor  night,  who  worship 
"  the  Beast  and  his  image,  and  whosoever  receiveth  the 
"mark  of  his  name."  "And  again,  they  said,  Alleluia: 
*'  and  her  smoke  rose  up  for  ever  and  ever.'*'  "  And  the  devil, 
''  that  deceived  them,  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  and  brim- 
'*  stone,  where  the  Beast  and  the  false  prophet  are,  and  shall 
"  be  tormented  day  and  night,/or  ever  and  ever."^ 

In  all  these  places,  the  Improved  Vei'sion  agrees  with  our 
bible,  in  the  translation  of  eis  aiona  and  its  reduplicate.  But 
as  these  passages  declare  the  doctrine  of  future  punishment 
very  plainly,  it  becomes  necessary  for  them  to  add  a  few 
rotes,  in  order  to  contradict  the  text.  Thry  have  one  to  Rev. 
xiv.  11,  <*The  smoke  of  their  torment  shall  go  up/or  ever 
and  ever.''  Their  note  reads  as  follows;  viz.  "It  would  be 
**  very  unreasonable  to  infer  the  gloomy  doctrine  of  eternal 
"  misery  from  the  loose  and  figui  ative  language  of  a  pro- 
"  phetic  vision,  in  opposition  to  the  plainest  dictates  of  rea- 
*'  son  and  justice,  and  to  the  whole  tenor  of  divine  revela- 
**  tion.  But  if  any  is  disposed  to  lay  undue  stress  upon  this 
**  text,  it  may  be  suilicient  to  remark,  that  it  is  not  here  as- 
"  seKed  that  the  torment  continues,  but  that  the  smoke  of  it 
*'  ascends/or  ever  and  ever.     The  smoke  of  a  pile  in  which 

B  Mh.  ji>.  29.  2  ['c(.  ii.  17,  Jude  13.  Rev.  xit.  11.  xix.  3.  xx.  10. 


299 

"  a  criminal  has  been  consumed  may  continue  to  ascend  long 
"  after  the  wretched  viciim  has  ceased  to  suftei.  Aud  a  me- 
"  morial  of  the  puiiisliment  which  has  been  inflirted  on  vice 
"  may  remain  long  after  vice  itself  lias  been  utterly  exter- 
*"*  minated.  After  all,  as  the  prophecy  relates  wholly  to 
'^  states  of  things  in  the  present  world,  the  punishments 
"  threatened  ought,  in  all  reason,  to  be  understood  of  tempo- 
**  ral  punishments,  and  not  of  the  sufferings  of  a  future  life. 
**  So  in  Jude,  verse  7,  Sodom  and  Gomorrha  are  represented 
"  as  suffering  the  vengeance  of  eternal  fire,  i.  e.  of  a  tempo- 
**  ral  calamity,  a  fire  which  completely  desti-oyed  them." 

Whether  eternal  means  temporal,  we  hope  to  examine  in 
the  next  section,  whicli  treats  of  aionios.  But  it  is  some- 
what remarkable,  that  while  this  note  says  that  eternal  means 
temporal,  it  substantially  concedes,  that  for  ever  and  ever 
means  to  an  endiuss  duration.  They  admit  that  the  smoke 
ascends /orever  and  ever,  that  is,  without  end  ;  but  they  deny 
that  sinners  are  tormented /or  ever  ^/ni  ewer,  that  is,  without 
end.  If, by  this  phrase, they  uiid-rstood  a  limited  time,  then 
what  they  luive  said,  would  amount  to  a  denial  that  sinners 
endure  a  limited  punishment;  a  thing  which  they  never  in- 
tended. It  is  only  an  en?! less  punishment  which  they  deny  : 
and  this  endless  punishment  they  admit  would  have  been  here 
declared,  if  the  text  had  declai'ed  the  same  concerning  the 
toi'ment  of  men's  persons,  that  it  has,  concerning  the  smoke 
of  their  torment.  On  this  ground,  therefore,  they  shall  be 
met.  I  shall  not  throw  away  time  in  disputing  whether  the 
Apocalypse  relates  wholly  to  (lie  present  world  ;  for  as  the 
Universalists  and  Orthodox  alike,  quote  from  it,  for  and 
against  the  eternal  salvation  of  all  men,  it  shall  be  taken  for 
granted,  that  the  assertion  contained  in  the  above  note,  is 
gratuitous,  contradictory  and  absurd.  Neither  shall  I  un- 
dertake formally  to  defend  the  infallibility  of  revelation,  in 
whole  or  in  part,  in  opposition  to  the  scornful  reflection 
contained  in  the  above  note.  The  plenary  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures,  I  must  now  take  for  granted  ;  and  leave  it  to  in- 
fidels and  heretics,  to  prate  about  the  "  loose"  language  of 
scripture,  and  about  the  "  far-fetched  analogies,  and  inac- 
curate reasonings"  of  inspired  Apostles ;  as  this  same  Im- 
proved Version  has  done,  in  another  note  also,  at  the  close  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 

If  it  were  possible  for  a  conscientious  man,  to  write  such 
a  note  as  that  of  the  Improved  Version,  on  Rev.  xiv.  11,  he 
would  do  it  from  a  sincere  conviction,  that  it  was  only  the 


300 

smoke  of  torment  which  is  to  continne  for  ever  and  ever*  after 
the  sufferings  of  sinners  have  ceased  :  he  would  do  it  from  a 
real  belief  that  neither  that  passage  of  Revelation,  nor  any- 
other  passage,  taught  that  sinners  themselves  were  to  be  tor- 
mented/or  ever  and  ever.  Yet  in  Rev.  xx.  10,  the  same  thing 
which  was  before  declared  of  the  smoke  of  torment,  is  said 
of  sinners  expressly.  *'  And  the  devil,  that  deceived  them, 
**  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,  where  the 
**  Beast  and  the  false  prophet  are,  and  shall  be  tormented  day 
**  and  night/or  ever  and  ever.''''  As  it  will  not  do  to  answer 
this  text,  by  talking  of  smoke  without  fire,  or  fire  witliout 
fuel,  the  Improved  Version  escapes  its  force,  by  retreating 
to  allegory,  the  last  and  never  failing  refuge,  of  imbecile 
corruption  and  blind  depravity.  According  to  them,  "the 
*'  persons  who  are  here  said  to  be  tormented  for  ever  and 
**  ever^  are  not  real,  but  figurative,  and  symbolical  persons, 
**  the  devil,  the  beast,  and  tiie  false  prophet.  The  place 
"  therefore,  the  kind,  and  the  duration  of  their  torment,  must 
"  also  be  figurative.'*  When  God  tells  these  children  of  de- 
lusion, that  the  smoke  of  torment  shall  continue  for  ever; 
they  pretend  that  it  is  nothing  but  smoke.  When  God  tells 
them,  that  the  devil  and  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet,  and 
lall  who  worship  and  follow  tliem,  shall  be  tormented  for 
ever;  these  wonderful  expounders  say,  none  of  these  ai'e  real 
beings:  and  if  they  had  been  told  expressly,  that  the  Em- 
peror and  the  Pope,  and  their  secular  and  ecclesiastical  sub- 
alterns, with  Judas  and  the  authors  of  the  Improved  Ver- 
sion, should  be  punished  for  ever;  they  would  reply,  this  is 
a  '*  heart- withering  doctrine,^^  conveyed  in  "  loose''  lan- 
guage, as  I  conceive,  "  in  opposition  to  the  plainest  dictates 
of  reason,"  and  therefore,  I  am  not  "disposed  to  lay  undue 
stress  upon"  it.  God  has  told  us  of  a  real  devil,  real  sin- 
ners, and  a  real  hell :  if,  by  the  pestilential  breath  of  a  little 
squadron  of  these  rebels,  their  whole  host  is  to  evaporate 
into  mere  shadows,  and  figures,  and  symbols;  who  can  tell 
where  this  process  of  pride  and  folly  will  end  ?  Will  they 
not  next  declare,  with  equal  truth,  that  there  are  none  but 
imaginary  saints,  an  imaginary  heaven,  and  an  imaginary 
God  ? 

J5ut  one  feels  a  natural  curiosity,  to  know,  what  my  op- 
ponent's doubly  improved  version  makes  of  these  authori- 
ties. He  exactly  follows  the  directions  which  1  gave  some 
time  ago,  for  obtaining  a  name,  as  a  linguist  and  a  critic. 
"At  adopts  Scarlett's  translaiiuu  of  the  words  in  question. 


30i 

and  copies  tht  notes  of  the  Improved  Version,  as  his  oww^ 
without  giving  credit  to  any  one  for  them.'  No  wonder  that 
the  University  of  Cambridge,  when  they  received  his  book 
Jooked  in  silent  amazement,  on  such  audacity.  If,  however' 
a  man  of  Scarlett's  lia;ht  metal,  had  been  alive,  he  would  not 
probably  have  been  silent.  May  God  presnve  us  from  the 
principles  of  Universalism,  and  from  its  deleterious  effects 
upon  the  morals  of  its  votaries. 

e. 

Aionios. 

^  This  word  is  found  in  the  first  and  the  five  last  of  the  New 
Testament  authorities,  quoted  in  the  commencement  of  this 
second  branch  of  affirmative  evidence.  Thus  it  is  six  times 
connected  with  future  punishment.  Whether  it  means  a^w- 
lu/e/i/  eternal^  in  these  instances,  will  depend  in  a  great  mea- 
sure, upon  the  meaning  in  which  it  is  used,  in  the  remainder 
of  the  seventy-one  times,  in  which  it  occurs  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. It  will  be  found  predicated  of  infinite  duration, 
past  as  well  as  future. 

I.  It  is  applied  four  times,  to  things  unseen,  to  God,  his 
Spirit,  power  and  glory  *•  The  things  which  are  seen,  are 
*'  temporal :  hut  the  tilings  which  are  not  seen,  are  eternal:' 
*'  According  to  the  commandment  of  the  everlasting  God.**' 
*'  To  whom  be  honour  and  power  everlasting:^  Christ 
"  thi-ough  the  eternal  Spirit  offered  himself,  without  spot,  to 
God."*  In  rendering  aionios  in  these  texts,  the  Improved 
Vci-sion  agrees  with  our  bible,  as  with  all  others,  in  general, 
in  every  language.  On  the  last  text,  my  oppc.nent  copies  a 
note  of  theirs,  for  w  hich  he  gives  them  credit :  but  he  follows 
Scarlett,  in  transcribing  instead  of  translating. 

■  2.  It  is  applied  five  times  to  Christ,  his  covenant,  king- 
dom, and  gospel." 

3.  It  is  applied  three  times,  to  eternity  pasty  "According 
<*  to  the  revelation  of  the  mystery,  which  was  kept  secret, 
**  since  the  world  began. "^  "  Who  hath  saved  us"  "  ac- 
**  cording  to  his  own  purjwse  and  grace,  which  was  given  us 

V  He  only  altered  etemal  into  aionian  ;  and  put  to  the  cures  ofa^es.  instead  of 
for  ever  and  aver.  o       j    o  j, 

w  2  Cor.  iv.  18.  Rom.  xvi.  26.  I  Tim.  vi.  16.  Heb.  ix.  14.  ) 

X  1  John  i   2.  v.  20    Heb    xiii  20.  2  Pet.  i.  U.  Rev  xiv.  6. 
y  Rom.  xvi.  25.  2  Tim.  i.  9.  Tit.  i.  2. 

^  xf ovoi?  aiwv.o.s.    Rom.  xti.  25.  Comp.  1  Pet.  i.  12.  «  Which  things  thr  an- 
gels desire  to  look  into." 


-^*  in  Christ  Jesus,  before  the  world  began."*  "  In  hope  ot'eter'- 
*^  nal  life,  which  God,  that  cannot  lie,  promised  before  the 
*•  world  began."o  The  same  words  Chronoi  aionioi,  occuring 
in  nil  these  places,  have  received  a  uniform  translation,  in 
our  bible.  Not  so  with  my  opponent's  excessively  improved 
rersion.  The  same  wortis,  he  renders  former  uges^  in  the 
first  text,  and  aionian  times,  in  the  two  last.  This,  however, 
was  necessary,  in  order  to  make  his  New  Translation,  a 
faithful  copy  of  Scailett's  old  one.  How  easy  it  is,  now-a- 
days,  to  translate  from  the  original  Greek ! 

On  these  two  last  texts,  Macknight  speaks  as  follows;  viz. 
^  Supposing  the  word  aionios  in  this  clause,  to  signify  eier- 
**  naif  the  literal  translation  of  the  passage  would  be,  before 
*•  eternal  times.  But  that  being  a  contradiction  in  terms, 
*  our  translators,  contrary  to  the  propriety  of  the  Greek 
"  language,  have  rendered  it,  before  the  world  began,''''  Froili 
such  reasoning  as  this,  the  most  eminent  anti-universalist 
polemic  has  relinquished  these  two  instances,  and  these  alone, 
of  all  the  seventy-one,  in  which  this  word  occurs.  But  if 
these  a  priori  reasonittgs  be  regarded,  we  may  speculate 
away  every  tiling  that  is  ^  aluable  in  criticism  and  theology. 
Language  is  arbitrary,  and  is  formed  by  custom.  The  use 
of  ancient  languages  is  no  more  subject  to  the  control  of  a 
modern  critic,  than  the  fires  of  ^tna  are  subject  to  a  modern 
engineer.  This  sort  of  reasoning  would  attach  absurdity  to 
some  of  the  best  authorized  usages  of  our  own  language.  Is 
it  more  contradictory  to  say,  that  before  eterniti/  and  abso- 
lute eternity  mean  the  same  thing,  than  to  say  that  ravel  and 
nnravel  mean  the  same  ?  Berause  two  negatives  make  an 
aftiriitative  with  us,  shall  we  charge  the  Greeks  with  absur- 
dity, for  making  them  an  emphatical  negative  ?  It  is  well 
for  us,  that  there  are  some  men,  of  all  ages,  and  all  degrees 
of  improvement,  whom  such  sophistry  never  moves.  The 
established  signification  of  aionios,  eiernal^  did  not  prevent 
Gregory  Nazianzen  from  using  proaionios,  before  eternal, 
in  the  same  sense.  Thus  is  it  understood  by  the  best  mo- 
dern expositors  of  the  language.  Hedcricus  explains  pro- 
aionios, by  the  Latin  ^tkrnus,  eternal;  and  Scapula  ex- 
plains the  same  word,  by  omni  /eternitate  prior,  fe^ore 
all  eternity.  This  is,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  as  absurd, 
as  the  expression  before  ifie  eternal  times,  which  Macknight 

^  '"■^o  X?"^''^^  a(Wvio;v.   2  Tim.  i.  9. 
^  '"'^0  X^ovwv  ftiwviwv.   Tit,  K  2t 
c  P.  222. 


SOS 

has  condemned.  Yet  either  before  the  eternal  times^  or  hefam 
all  eternity^  would  be  as  correct  a  translation  of  the  texts  iu 
question,  as  **  above  alt  heavens*^  is  of  Eph.  iv.  JO.  l"he 
Scriptures  recognize  three  heavens,  the  serial  and  aetherial 
heavens,  and  the  lieavens  of  heavens  :  higlier  than  which,  no 
one  ever  went.  Yet  the  apostle  says,  "  He  that  descended, 
'*  is  the  same  also  thut  ascended  up  iar  above  all  heavens, 
«  that  he  might  fill  all  things:"  Now,  if  the  heavens  are  to 
be  understood  literally,  would  not  Macknight's  mode  ot  in- 
terpretation make  this  passage  say,  that  Christ  has  not  only 
ascended  above  the  fiist  heavens,  our  atmosphere,  in  which 
clouds  are  suspended,  and  birds  fly;— not  only  ab(»ve  the  se- 
cond heavens,  in  which  tlie  sun,  moon  and  stars  are  placed ; — 
but  above,  and  far  above,  all  heavens,  even  the  third  hea- 
vens, the  residence  of  God  and  angels,  and  saints?  But  sup- 
pose that  in  this  text,  heavens  should  be  understood  metony- 
mically.  Suppose  that  it  means  the  inhabitants  of  heaven. 
Would  not  Macknight's  mode  of  interpretation  make  the 
text  say,  that  Christ  had  ascended  not  only  above  saints  and 
angels,  but  far  above  the  eternal  Father,  and  the  eternal 
Spirit  ?  It  is  easy  for  a  sickly  hypercriticism  to  find  absur- 
dities in  the  best  translation,  or  even  in  the  pure,  authentic, 
and  infallible  original.  Yet  in  answer  to  them  all,  1  would 
say,  tliat  Christ  has  ascended  into  heaven;  and  that  to  ex- 
press this  emphatically,  the  apostle  said  that  he  had  ascend- 
ed far  above  all  heavens.  So  I  would  say  that  salvation 
through  Christ,  was  promised  before  the  world  began,  before 
the  commencement  of  time,  that  is,  from  eternity:  and  this 
is  emphatically  expressed  by  the  apostle,  when  speaking  of 
this  salvation,  as  a  thing  "which  God,  that  cannot  lie,  pro- 
mised, PRO  CHRoNON  AioNioN,  bejore  the  eternal  times; 
that  is,  from  an  absolute  eternity. 

There  is  not  a  whit  more  of  absurdity,  in  this  mode  of  ex- 
pression, than  there  is  in  the  addition  and  multi])lication  of 
eternities,  which  we  find  practised  in  the  Old  and  New  I'es- 
tament,  with  such  intelligihl<»  familiarity,  and  such  un- 
questionable coi-rectness.  In  most  subjects,  the  plural  is  more 
than  the  singular:  not  so  with  olam  and  aion.  In  most  cases, 
the  amount  is  greatly  enhanced  by  the  multiplication  of  a 
plural.  Myriads  of  myriads  mentioned  Rev.  ix  16,  is  ten 
thousand  times  more  than  the  simple  plural.  Not  so  with 
eternity.  The  addition  or  multiplication  of  a«o»s  amounts  to 
nothing  more  than  an  emphatical  way  of  expressing  a  sim- 
ple eternity.    Eis  aiona  and  its  reduplicate  mean  the  same 


304 

thing.  So  the  ■«  ord  God  and  its  reduplicate  mean  the  same 
thing.  When  the  Council  of  Nice  sa)S,  "We  believe  in  one 
Goii,"  did  they  mean  any  thing  more,  or  any  thing  less  than 
the  true  God  ?  When  the  same  Council  say  that  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  is  **God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  very  Goii  of 
very  God/'  they  speak  thus,  not  to  represent  the  Saviour,  as 
more  or  less  than  God,  but  to  express  in  an  unequivocal  man* 
ner,  his  essential  Deity,  and  his  peculiar  and  eternal  r«'la- 
tion  to  the  Father.  So  we  speak  of  heaven  as  God's  dwelling 
place  J  and  we  mean  no  other  than  his  dwelling-place,  when 
we  speak  of  the  heavens  and  tlie  heavens  of  heavens^  or  Jar 
above  all  heavens.  Thus  do  the  scriptures  mean  the  same 
thing  hy  from  eternity^  and  ''^before  the  eternal  times.''* 

4.  It  is  applied  ten  times  to  the  future  duration  of  Chris- 
tian fraternity,  of  the  celestial  house  and  habitation  of  the 
saints,  of  their  glor^  and  inheritance,  consolation,  salvation, 
and  redemption.  "  For  perhaps  he  therefore  departed  for  a 
*<  season,  that  thou  mightest  receive  him  /or  ever.'*  "  1  say 
**  unto  you,  make  to  yourselves  friends  of  the  Mammon  of 
*■*  unrighteousness,  that  wlien  ye  fail,  they  may  receive  you 
«•  into  everlastimj  habitations  "  "•  Therefore  I  endure  all 
*'  things  for  the  elects'  sake,  that  they  may  also  obtain  the 
**  salvation  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus,  with  eternal  glory.'* 
«  But  the  God  of  all  grace,  who  hath  railed  us  unto  his  eier- 
**  ual  glory,  by  Christ  Jesus,  after  that  ye  have  suffered 
•'  awhile,  make  you  perfect,  stab lish,  strengthen,  settle  you." 
*•  Now  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself,  and  God,  even  our 
"  Father,  who  hath  loved  us,  and  given  ns  everlasting  conso- 
*'  lation,  and  good  hope,  through  grace."  "The  promise  of 
«  eternal  inheritance."  "  Having  obtained  eternal  redemp- 
^  tion  for  us."  "  He  became  the  author  of  eternal  salvation 
"  unto  all  them  that  obey  him."  "  An  house  not  made  with 
"  hands,  eterna  in  the  heavens.'*  '*  A  far  more  exceeding  and 
*<  eternal  weight  of  glory. "d 

The  above  passages  speak  of  the  future  happiness  of  be- 
lievers, which  my  opponent  professes  to  believe  eternal.  They 
contrast  that  eternal  happiness  with  these  temporal  afflic- 
tions; and  they  are  intended  to  comfoi-tthe  ('hristian  under 
the  calamities  of  time.  No  one  ought,  therefore,  to  doubt, 
that  the  word  aionios  is  here  used  in  an  unlimited  sense,  and 
has  been  correctly  rendered  in  our  bible.  But,  Scarlett, 
knowing  the  consequence  of  such  an  admission,  chose  rather 

(1  Fhilem.  xv.  Luke  xvi.  9.  2  Tim.  ij.  10.  1  Pet.  T.  10.  2Tke»».  u.  16.  Hcb.  is. 
Ir5, 12,  \.  9-  3  Cor.  v.  I.  it.  17, 


305 

to  transcribe  than  translate,  and  has  thus  spoken  to  the  uui- 
learned  reader  in  an  unknown  tongue.  A  Ministerial  brother 
in  the  West,  once  lent  me  a  book  on  Universalism  ;  in  which 
the  author,  whose  name  I  cannot  recollect,  supposes  a  case 
of  a  poor  afflicted  widow,  endeavouring  to  seek  in  religion, 
an  alleviation  for  her  many  and  heavy  sorrows.  Applying 
to  Mr.  Scarlett,  a  professed  Christian  Minister,  he  lends  her 
a  copy  of  his  New  Testament.  She  opens  at  2  Cor.  iv.  17. 
"  For  our  momentary  light  affliction  is  working  out  for  us 
•'  a  most  exceeding  (sonian  weight  of  glory."  This  treats 
of  affliction,  and  is  probably  applicable  to  her  case ;  but  what 
it  means,  she  cannot  tell.  She  visits  her  learned  instructor, 
and  says,  "Deai-  Mr.  Scarlett;  what  does  «oma«  mean  ?" 

*  Why,  Madam,  it  means  agical,  or  age-lasting.'*  "  And  may 
"  I  be  so  bold  as  to  ask,  what  is  the  meaning  of  agical,  or  age- 
**  lasting  ?"  ^  Age-lasting ^ov agical f  Madam,  has  different  sig- 

*  nifications.  It  sometimes  means  as  long  as  the  world  lasts, 
'  and  sometimes,  as  long  as  a  dispensation,  or  a  man's  life 

*  lasts,  whether  it  be  a  thousand  years  or  one  year.'  "And 
**  dear  Mr.  Scarlett,  is  that  all  the  extent  of  glory  and  hap- 
'*  piness,  which  Christianity  offers  to  a  poorold  widow,  who 
**  is  sinking  under  the  weight  of  more  than  half  a  century  of 
**  sorrow  ?" 

But,  from  my  opponent's  reply  to  this  supposed  case,  he 
would  be  understood  to  insinuate  that  it  was  not  found  in  a 
book,  as  stated,  but  that  it  was  manufactured  for  the  occa- 
sion, and  the  name  of  Scarlett  used,  where  his  was  really 
intended.  He  therefore  requests  that  his  own  name  may  be 
openly  used  in  such  cases.  The  truth  is,  there  is  very  little 
more  difference  between  the  two,  than  there  is  between  an 
original  and  a  copy.  This  request  may  be  complied  with, 
as  soon  as  I  have  given  a  becoming  attention  to  his  transla- 
tion and  exposition  of  the  afflicted  widow's  text.  "  For  our 
'*  present  light  affliction  worketh  for  us  an  excessively  ex- 
"  ceeding  aionian  weight  of  glory.'*  In  a  note  he  gives  us 
the  Gi-eek,*^  and  then  speaks  as  follows,  viz.  "  Now  Viaionion 
<*  be  strictly  infinite  or  endless,  how  can  any  thing  exceed  it, 
**  even  by  a  rhetorical  figure,  so  as  to  be  hyperbole  upon  hy- 
perbole  ahove  or  beyond  it  ?"  The  sentiment  of  this  question 
he  has  urged  before  you,  not  only  interrogatively  but  posi- 
tively. "Excessively  exceeding  aionian  weight  of  glory,*' 
is  an  altered  translation  borrowed  from  one  who  had  little 

Pp 


306 

idea  of  the  perversion  which  it  was  doomed  to  undergo.  Iti 
author  meant  exceeding  to  be  in  apposition  with  aionian  or 
eternal,  and  would  have  been  as  well  satisfied  to  have  ren- 
dered it  "  exceedingly  excessive  eternal ;"  thus  making  it 
evident  that  the  one  adjective  was  in  apposition  with  the 
other.  This  is  consistent  with  the  original,  and  leaves  aionian 
with  its  true  meaning,  that  of  ahsolutly  eternal.  But  my  op- 
ponent treats  exceeding  as  a  participle  governittg  aionian ' 
thus  representing  the  weight  of  glory  as  exceeding  aionian, 
in  such  a  manner  as  to  excel  it,  transcend  it,  go  **  above  or 
beyond  it."  If  this  criticism  had  any  foundation,  then  might 
there  be  one  place  in  the  whole  New  Testaujent,  in  which 
aionos  is  used  with  a  limited  signification.  But  every  person 
who  understands  the  Greek  language,  will  perceive,  at  a 
glance,  that  this  is  a  mere  artifice,  intended  to  mislead  those 
who  could  not  examine  the  original  for  themselves. 

I  have  reason  to  believe  that  my  opponent  has  read  a  com- 
ment upon  this  passage,  by  Chrysostom,  one  of  the  Greek 
Fathers.'  How  differently  does  this  early  and  enlightened 
scholar  interpret  the  words  of  his  own  language,  from  one 
who  claims  the  character  of  a  translator  from  the  original 
Greek !  In  explaining  this  passage  of  the  apostle,  Chrysos- 
tom says,  "  He  opposes  things  present  to  things  future,  a 
**  moment  to  eternity,  lightness  to  weight,  affliction  to  glory; 
•*  nor  is  he  satisfied  with  this,  but  he  adds  another  word,  and 
**  that  a  reduplication,  saying,  *  kath^  hyperboten  eis  hyper- 
**  hohuy  that  is,  an  exceedingly  excessive greatness."s  Here 
this  eloquent  Greek  Father  does  not  represent  aionian^  as 
infinitely  transcended  by  something  else,  but  he  considers 
the  apostle  as  contrasting  aionian  with  the  moment  of  this 
life,  and  making  it  to  excel  it,  by  an  exceedingly  excessive 
greatness.  As  this  cannot  be  truly  said,  of  any  thing  but  eler- 
nlty.,  Chrysostom  has  given  his  decided  testimony,  that  aio-^ 
niun  means  an  absolutely  eternal 

That  gloss  of  my  opponent,  by  which  he  would  make  ex- 
ceeding to  be  a  participle,  governing  aionian^  and  thus  ex- 
ceedingly limiting  its  duration,  is  probably  an  invention  of 
his  own.  No  translator  or  commentator,  ancient  or  modern, 
within  the  restricted  circle  of  my  acquaintance,  appears  ever 


f  'Vh\t  observation  was  made  in  the  debate,  not  from  an  apprehension  that  mf 
npponf'nl  wii8  familiar  with  the  Fathers,  but  because  tlie  convmcntary  in  question 
is  <iuotPfl  It)  Parkhurst,  wliose  lexicons  1  soon  found,  formed  the  liorizon  of  my 
oppouf.-iit's  crilicul  researches. 


307 

to  have  imagined  such  an  absurdity.  Even  the  authors  oi' 
the  Improved  Version,  who  wrote  for  the  very  purpose  of 
misleading  theii-  readers,  had  too  much  knowledge  of  Greek, 
and  of  the  present  state  of  society, to  attempt  such  an  imposi- 
tion. Their  translation  is,  *'  F^or  our  present  light  affliction 
**  worketh  for  us  a  very  exceeding  and  everlasting  weight  of 
**  glory."  Although  this  does  not  strongly  present  the  anti- 
theses of  the  original,  it  still  offers  the  consolation  of  eternal 
happiness  in  heaven,  to  God's  afflicted  and  poor  people  on 
earth. 

In  the  next  chapter  of  this  Epistle,  Paul  preaches  the  same 
consolatory  doctrine,  without  the  use  of  tiiose  hyperboles 
which  we  liave  been  discussing.  *'  For  we  know  that  if  our 
"  earthly  house  of  this  tabernacle  were  dissolved,  we  have 
**  a  building  of  God,  an  house  not  made  with  hands,  eternal 
"  in  the  heavens  ''**  My  opponent,  as  usual,  has  this,  *'aio- 
nian  in  the  heavens."  Now  I  will  not  send  the  afflicted  wi- 
dow to  Mr.  Scarlett,  about  this  translation :  but  as  my  oppo- 
nent has  requested  that  his  name  may  be  used  instead  of 
Scarlett's,  I  will  make  application  to  him  myself.  Here  is 
a  poor,  weakly,  sickly  sinner,  who,  to  all  appearance,  is  not 
far  from  his  latter  end.  Nothing  but  the  Gospel  of  Christ 
can  give  me  comfort.  While  my  earthly  tabernacle  is  near 
to  dissolution,  I  read  in  a  certain  tiling,  professing  to  be  a 
New  Translation,  that  there  is  an  aionian  house  above.  I 
enquire  into  the  meaning  of  this  word.  Can  you  tell  me, 
Mr.  Scarlett^  or,  as  my  opponent  prefers  my  using  another 
name,  can  you  tell  me,  Mr.  Crimson,  what  is  meant  by  aio- 
nian, in  your  translation  ?  In  tlie  2lGth  page  of  his  Lectures, 
he  answers  me  "that  these  words  do  not,  in  any  instance, 
"  necessarily  convey  an  idea  of  eternity  ;  nor  yet  an  endless 
**  duration  of  time.''  Yes,  these  are  my  opponent's  words: 
and  the  tendency  of  them  to  deny  that  the  saints  have  any 
revealed  charter  of  eternal  happiness  is  evident.  And  is  it  a 
fact  then,  that  even  that  house  which  is  not  made  with  hands, 
is  subject  to  dissolution?  So  natural  is  the  leaning  of  the 
doctrine  of  univei'sal  salvation,  to  that  of  universal  annihi- 
lation, or  damnation,  or  Atheism,  that  it  would  leave  us  to 
mere  conjecture,  or,  at  best,  to  unassisted  reason,  to  ascer- 
tain whether  any  should  enjoy  eternal  happiness  or  not. 

My  opponent  has  also  objected,  to  my  understanding  of 
the  first  text  quoted,  in  the  beginning  of  this  sub-section.  It 

h  2  Cor.  r.  1. 


308 

is  Philemon  15.  In  his  8th  Lecture  we  find  the  following  p'a- 
ragrapli  extracted  from  Scarlett;  viz  "The  word  aionian 
**  expresses  duration  or  continuance;  hut  it  is  sometimes  of 
'*  a  short,  and  at  other  times  of  a  longer  duration.  Paul,  writ- 
**  ing  to  Philemon  concerning  Onesimus,  says,  *  perhaps  he 

*  was  separated  for  a  while,  that  thou  mightest  have  him 

*  aionianly.'*  This  certainly  could  mean,  only  during  the  life 
"  of  Onesimus."  When  Scarlett  is  the  teacher,  my  opponent 
is  a  very  apt  scholar.  Accordingly,  his  New  Testament 
rendei's  the  passage,  "  Perhaps  also  for  this  reason  he  was 
*'  separated  for  a  little  while,  that  thou  mightest  have  him, 
"for  lift.^''  Macknight,  whom  he  has  quoted  in  his  favour, 
may  he  well  balanced  hy  Estius,  whom  Macknight  has  cited 
in  our  favour.  But  we  both  profess  to  have  better  evidence 
than  any  inan^s  opinion.  My  opponent's  argument  is  this ; — 
Paul  intimates  that  Onesimus  may  be  the  slave  of  Philemon 
aiomaniy; — But  in  the  future  life  there  is  no  slavery; — there- 
fore, aionian  must  mean  during  this  life.  This  is  plausible; 
and  it  would  be  unanswerable,  if  it  were  not  for  one  thing : 
and  that  is,  that  the  major  proposition  contradicts  the  very 
passage  which  my  opponent  depends  upon  to  support  it. 
Where  does  the  apostle  say,  that  Philemon  may  have  Onesi- 
mus as  a  servant yo*-  ever  ?  The  Improved  Version,  which 
coincides  with  our  translation ;  (and  which,  notwithstanding 
its  deep  depravity,  is  often  better  than  Macknight,  that  cold- 
hearted  apostate,)  the  Improved  Version,  reads  as  follows : 
"  For  perhaps  he  therefore  departed  for  a  time,  that  thou 
*'  mightest  receive  him  /or  ever;  no  longer  as  a  servant,  but 
*'  as  above  a  servant,  a  beloved  brother.^*  In  this  world  it  is 
an  inestimable  privilege  of  Christ's  mystical  body,  that  its 
members  are  spiritually  united  to  their  common  head,  and 
to  each  other.  But  there  is  also  a  promise,  that  "  neither 
death  nor  life,'"*  "  nor  things  present  nor  things  to  come," 
shall  dissolve  this  union.'  My  argument  therefore,  is  this ; — 
Paul  says,  that  Philemon  may  have  Onesimus,  as  his  aio- 
nion  brother; — But  Christian  brotherhood  is  absolutely 
eternal ; — Therefore  aionion  means  absolutely  eternal.  And 
so  it  plainly  does  in  all  the  ten  instances  quoted  in  this  sub- 
section. 

5.  In  the  forty-one  remaining  instances  of  its  occurrence, 
unconnected  with  punishment,  it  is  always  found  connected 
with  life;  and  in  every  individual  text,  speaks  of  a  state  of 

i  Rom.  vfii.  38,39'. 


309 

endless  happiness.  J  "  "What  shall  I  do  to  inherit  eternal  [i(eV\ 
*'  Search  the  Scriptures:  for  in  them  ye  think  ye  Ivavg  eternal 
**■  life,  and  they  are  they  which  testify  of  me.*'  '*  Ye  put  it 
*'  from  you,  and  judge  yourselves  unworthy  of  everlasting 
*'  li/e.^'    ••  No  murderer  hath  eternal  life  abiding  in  him." 
**  Keep  yourselves  in  the  love  of  God,  looking  for  the  mercy 
**  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  unto  eternal  life.^'  "And  every 
"  one  that  hath  forsaken  houses,  or  brothers,  or  sisters,  or 
"  father,  or  mother,  or  wife,  or  children,  or  lands,  for  my 
"  sake,  shall  receive  one  hundred  fold,  and  shall  inherit  ever- 
•*  lasting  life"^  **  Whosoever  believeth  in  him,  should  not 
**  perish,  but  have  eternal  life:'''  or  *■' everlasting  life.'^    '*He 
*'  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting  /i/e."  *'  The  wa- 
**  ter  that  I  shall  give  him,  shall  be  in  him,  a  well  of  water 
**  springing  up  into  everlasting  life.'*    '*  He  that  reapeth,  re- 
"  ceiveth  wages,  and  gathereth  fruit  unto  life  eternal.'"  "  He 
"  that  heareth  my  word,  and  believeth  on  him  that  sent  me, 
'*  hath  everlasting  /i/e,and  shall  not  come  into  condemnation, 
"  but  is  passed  from  deatli  unto  life."  •'  Labour  not  for  the 
**  meat  which  perisheth,  but  for  that  which  enduretli  unto 
"  everlasting  life.'''  "  This  is  the  will  of  him  that  sent  me, 
"  that  every  one  which  sceth  the  Son,  and  believeth  on  him, 
•<  may  have  everlasting  life.^'  '*  He  that  believeth  on  me,  hath 
**  everlasting  life.''''     "  Whoso  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh 
**  my  blood,  hath  eternal  life.**     *'  Thou  hast  the  words  of 
*'  eternal  'f/e."  *'  And  I  give  unto  them  eternal  life,  and  they 
"  shall  never  perish,  neither  shall  any  man  pluck  them  out 
**  of  my  iiand."  "  He  that  loveth  his  life,  shall  lose  it,  and  he 
**  that  hateth  his  life  in  this  world,  shall  keep  it  unto  life  eter- 
"  wa/."     "  And  1  know  tliat  his  commandment  is  life  ever- 
**  tasting,'  "  Thou  hast  given  him  power  over  all  flesh,  that 
"  he  should  give  eternal  life  to  as  many  as  thou  hast  given 
"  him.  And  this  is  life  eternal;  that  they  might  know  thee, 
•*  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  thou  hast  sent  ''>» 
"  And  as  many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal  life,  bejieved.'* 

J  During  the  debate,  I  gave  a  concise  ploss  upon  these  texts  as  they  were  read, 
to  prove  that  they  really  meant  eternal  life.  These  and  much  other  matter  which 
was  spoken,  and  much  which  was  prepared,  and  not  spoken,  I  omit,  for  preci- 
sion's sake,  in  the  written  argument.  Neither  are  all  of  the  texts  repeated  in 
whole  or  in  part ;  because  many  of  them  are  almost  in  the  same  words  :  but  aU 
are  referred  to  in  the  notes. 

k  Matt.  xix.  16.  i.  17.  Luke  x.  25,  xviii.  18- 

1  John  V.  39.  Acts  xiii.  46.  I  John  iii.  15.  Jude  21.  Matt.  six.  29.  Mk.  i.  30. 
Luke  xviii.  30. 

m  John  iii.  15,18,  36.  iv.  14,36.  T.  24.  ri.  27, 40,  47, 54,  68.  x.  28.  xii.  25,  50. 
xiii,  3,5. 


310 

*^'  To  them  who,  by  patient  continuance  in  well-doin§,  seek 
*'  for  glory  and  honour,  and  immortality,  eternal  lije.^* 
"  That  as  sin  hath  reigned  unto  death,  even  so  might  grace 
**  reign  through  righteousness,  unto  eternal  life,  by  Jesus 
"  Christ  our  Lord."  "  Ye  have  your  fruit  unto  holiness,  and 
*'  the  end  everlasting  life.  For  the  wages  of  sin  is  death  ;  but 
*•  the  gift  of  God  is  eternal  life,  through  Jesus  Christ  our 
"  Lord.'*  "  He  that  soweth  to  the  Spirit,  shall  of  the  Spirit 
*'  reap  life  everlasting,''^  *'  Howbeit,  for  this  cause  I  obtained 
**  mercy ;  that  in  me  first,  Jesus  Christ  might  shew  forth  all 
"  long-suffering,  for  a  pattern  to  them  which  should  hereaf- 
**  ter,  believe  on  him,  to  life  everlasting.''*  **  Fight  the  good 
**  fight  of  faith ;  lay  hold  on  eternal  life,*''^  '*  In  hope  of  e/er- 
*'  nal  life.*''  '*  According  to  the  hope  of  eternal  life.'^  *'  And 
"  this  is  the  promise  that  he  hath  promised  us,  even  eternal 
*'  life.'*  "  And  this  is  the  record,  that  God  hath  given  to  us 
*'  eternal  life,  and  this  life  is  in  his  Son."  "  These  things 
**  have  I  written  unto  you  that  believe  on  the  name  of  the 
**  Son  of  God,  tliat  ye  may  know  that  ye  have  eternal  life.'*o 

If  that  is  absolutely  eternal  life,  which  is  the  result  of 
God's  unparallelled  love,  which  is  Christ's  greatest  gift,  and 
the  subject  of  the  greatest  promise ; — if  that  be  really  eternal 
Hfef  which  Jews  and  murderers  rejected  and  forfeited,  and 
which  apostles,  saints  and  martyrs  gained,  through  grace, 
in  exchange  for  temporal  life; — if  that  be  truly  eternal  life, 
which  we  are  required  to  seek,  as  an  imperishable  good,  and 
an  everlasting  consolation,  connected  with  a  good  hope; — 
then,  aionios  means  ahsoiuteltf  eternal.  Socinians  themselves 
acknowledge  that  iwwor<a/i///,  or  incorruption  means  an  ab- 
solute eternity :  yet  in  the  above  passages,  God  has  promised 
eternal  life  to  those  who  seek  immorlality  or  incorruption. 
All  but  Atheists  acknowledge  that  God  exists,  in  the  exer- 
cise of  his  infinite  perfections,  to  an  absolute  eternity  :  yet  in 
the  above  authorities,  we  find  that  while  God  and  Christ 
thus  exist,  the  eternal  life  of  the  saints  shall  endure.P  So  far 
is  it  from  having  bounds  set  to  it,  in  the  passajjes  quoted, 
eternal  glory  is  expressly  contrasted  with  temporal  suffer- 
ing, and  the  eternal  house  and  habitation  of  believers  is  con- 
trasted with  their  earthly  and  failing  abode. 

Out  of  the  seveuty-one  places  in  which  this  word  occurs, 
we  have  now  recounted  sixty-five  ,•  in  all  of  which,  the  un- 

n  A.et8  xiii.  48.  Rom.  ii.  7,  v.  21.  vi.  22,  23.  Gal.  Ti.  8.  1  Tim.  i.  16.  vi.  1«,1P. 
o  Tit.  i.  2.  iii.  7.  1  John  ii,  215.  v.  II,  13. 
p  Rom.  ii.  7.  John  x.  28, 29. 


3(1 

learned,  as  well  as  the  learned,  can  perceive  that  aionios 
means  absolutely  eternal.  This  might  never  have  been  dis- 
puted, but  for  the  sake  of  the  i-eniainin.^  six,  which  read  as 
follows.  '*  He  that  shall  blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Ghost, 
**  hatii  never  forgiveness,  but  is  in  danger  oi  eternal  damna' 
"  Hon."  '*  Even  as  Sodom  and  Gomonha,  and  tl>e  cities  about 
*'  them,  in  like  manner,  giving  themselves  over  to  fornica- 
•*  tion,  and  going  after  strange  flesh,  ai'e  set  forth  an  exam- 
*'  pie,  suffering  the  vengeance  of  tternal  jireP  *'  Who  shall 
**  be  punished  with  evei  lasting  destruction  from  the  presence 
"  of  the  Lord,  and  from  the  glory  of  his  power.'*  *'  It  is  bet- 
**  ter  for  thee  to  enter  into  life  halt  or  maimed ;  rather  than 
**  having  two  hands  or  two  feet,  to  be  cast  into  everlasting 
'''-fire.''*  *'Tlien  shall  he  say  unto  them  on  the  left  hand,  Ue- 
*'  part  from  me  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire^  prepared  for 
"  the  devil  and  his  angels.*'  *'  And  these  sliall  go  away  into 
**  everlasting  punishment^  but  the  righteous  into  life  eternaU^q, 
The  note  which  my  opponent  has,  without  giving  credit, 
copied  from  the  Improved  Version,  on  the  first  of  these  texts^ 
was  worth  so  little,  that  he  appears  to  have  stolen  it  merely 
to  keep  his  hand  in.^  Concerning  the  eternal  fire,  mentioned 
in  the  second  text,  he  speaks  as  follows,  viz.  "  It  is  said  to 
*'  be  set  forth  as  an  example  to  others,  that  they  may  avoid  a 
*'  similar  fate.  Now,  I  ask  you,  my  hearers,  admitting  the 
*'  meaning  my  opponent  attaches  to  it  were  true,  can  that 
*'  which  takes  place  in  an  invisible  world,  be  an  example  to 
'*  those  who  exist  here,  and  who  have  never  seen  any  thing 
"  of  it,  nor  any  who  came  from  thence  ? — It  is  said  to  be  set 
*•  forth  :  of  course  it  must  be  something  that  is  brought  into 
*'  view,  and  not  that  which  is  hidden.  The  apostle  says,  (2 
"  Pet  ii.  6,)  '  And  turning  the  cities  of  Sodom  and  Gomor- 
*"  *  rah  into  ashes,  condemned  them  with  an  overthrow,  mak- 
"  *  ing  them  an  ensample  unto  those  that  after  should  live 
*•  'ungodly.'  Now,  I  ask,  what  fire  was  set  forth  as  an  ex- 
"  ample  to  other  nations,  wlio  should  afterwards  live  un- 
**  godly  ?  Could  it  be  the  fire  of  my  opponent's  Hell  in  an- 
*'  other  world,  which  was  set  forth  as  an  example  to  those 
"  who  should  live  here  as  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom  and  Go- 
**  morrah  ?  No,  my  hearers,  it  was  the  tire  which  destroyed 
"  those  cities,  and  continued  to  the  days  of  the  aj'ostle,  which 
•'  is  here  meant.'*  At  the  same  time,  he  quotes  from  Scarlett, 

q  Mk.  iii.  29.  Jude  7.  2Thcss.  i.  9.  Matt,  xviii.  8.  xxv.  41,  46. 
r  He  has  made  an  unirnporrant  alteration  of  a  few  words,  to  make  it  his  own  ; 
as  soipe  men  tak«  possession  ottheir  neighbonr's  cattle,  after  altering  their  mark*. 


312 

who  proiessed  to  quote  from  Whitby,  that  '*This  fire  lasted 
"  from  Abraham's  time,  till  after  the  apostolic  age ;  and  was 
*'  burning  in  the  time  of  Pliilo  Judseus,  the  beginning  of  the 
"  second  century."  In  his  Lectures,  he  tells  us,^  from  Scar- 
lett, that  tliis  fire  "  lasted  upwards  of  two  thousand  years," 
''  but  is  now  extinct/'^ 

The  substance  of  the  above  argument  is  this ; — Nothing 
can  be  set  forth  as  an  example,  but  that  which  is  submitted 
to  occular  inspection," — But  Sodom  and  Gomorrha  *'  are  set 
*'  forth  an  example,  sufiTering  the  vengeance  ofaionianjire;*'' — 
Therefore,  this  aionianjire  must  mean  that  visible  fire  which 
lasted  upwards  of  two  thousand  years,  but  is  now  extinct ; 
Wherefore,  it  cannot  be  an  absolutely  eternal  fire.  My  oppo- 
nent says,  *'  It  is  set  forth :  of  course,  it  must  be  something 
*'  that  is  brought  into  view ;  and  not  that  which  is  hidden.'' 
"  Can  that  which  takes  place  in  an  invisible  world  be  an  ex- 
^^  ample  to  those  who  exist  here,  and  who  have  never  seen 
"  any  thing  of  it,  nor  any  who  came  from  thence  ?" 

But,  in  reply  to  these  sage  remarks,  I  would  observe,  that 
he  would  not  believe  it,  if  one  were  to  come  from  thence.  For 
God  has  said,  "  If  they  hear  not  Moses  and  the  prophets, 
"  neither  will  they  be  persuaded,  though  one  rose  from  the 
*'  dead.''  But  is  it  true,  that  nothing  can  be  set  forth  as  an 
example,  but  that  which  is  seen  ?  James  says,  *'  Take,  my 
"  brethren,  the  prophets,  who  have  spoken  in  the  name  of 
"  the  Lord,  for  an  example  of  suffering  affliction,  and  of  pa- 
"  tience."t  Had  James  or  those  to  whom  he  wrote,  ever  seen 
these  prophets  i  Concei*ning  the  destruction  of  the  Israelites 
in  the  wilderness,  Paul  writes  to  the  Corinthians,  '*Now 
'*  tliese  things  were  our  examples,  to  the  intent  we  should 
"  not  lust  after  evil  things,  as  they  also  lusted."  **Now  all 
"  these  things  happened  unto  them  for  ensamples :  and  they 
"  are  written  for  our  admonition,  upon  whom  the  ends  of 
"  the  world  are  come.""  Had  Paul  or  the  Corinthians  ever 
seen  the  carnage  in  the  wilderness  ?  Moreover;  in  the  text 
quoted  above  by  my  opponent,  Peter  says  that  God  has  made 
the  case  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrha  "  an  ensampleunto  those 
"  that  after  should  live  ungodly."  Is  it  an  example  to  no  un- 
godly person  that  lias  not  seen  the  fire  ? 

The  manner  in  which  Universalists  contradict  themselves 
and  one  another  on  this  text  in  Jude,  looks  unfavourably. 


8  Minutes,  p.  274.    Lectures,  p.  207. 

t  Jas.  V.  10. 

u  ICor.  X.  6, 11. 


313 

My  Opponent,  using  a  stale  quibble,  observes  that  '■'''  the  term 
*'  aionion  is  not  connected  with  the  suffering  which  they  en- 
^*  dured,  but  with  the  fire  which  destroyed  them."  It  has  been 
shewn^that  elsewhere,  the  Improved  Version  used  this  same 
sophism.  But  here  it  contradicts  itself  as  well  as  my  Oppo- 
nent.  Instead  of  telling  us  that  it  is  only  the  fire  that  is  eter- 
nal, it  says  in  a  note,  that  it  is  ^^  everlasting  \n  its  effects;  the 
•*  cities  having  been  finally  desti-oyed."  What  are  the  effects 
of  suffering  the  vengeance  of  everlasting  fire,  has  been  shewn 
in  treating  the  word/re,  under  the  term  Gehen?ia.  The  same 
thing  is  established  by  what  was  there  said  of  tlie  scriptural 
words  destruction  and  damnation.  All  these  words  occur  in 
the  texts  quoted  above,  where  aionios  is  coimected  with  pun- 
ishment. In  one  of  them  it  is  said  that  sinners  '*  shall  be  pun- 
ished with  everlasting  destruction.''''  On  this  text  Mr.  Ballou 
says,  "That  which  "is  destroyed,  I  grant,  is  endlessly  de- 
•*  stroyed;"'  insinuating  that  it  is  sin  only,  and  not  the  sin- 
ner. What  is  the  subject  of  destruction,  let  the  whole  passage 
decide.  *'  The  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  Heaven, 
**  with  his  miglity  angels,  in  flaming  fire,  taking  vengeance 
**  on  them  that  know  not  God,  and  that  obey  not  the  gospel 
'*  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  who  shall  be  punished  with  ever- 
«  lasting  destruction.''^  If  language  can  be  understood,  then 
this  passage  declares  that  men  who  reject  the  gospel,  shall 
be  destroyed:  therefore,  according  to  Mr.  Ballou's  proposi- 
tion, these  sinners  will  be  endlessly  destroyed  j  or,  (as  an- 
other text  expresses  it,)  go  aw  ay  into  everlasting  punish- 
ment. 

In  the  text  here  alluded  to,  (Matt.  xxv.  46,)  the  same  word 
is  used  to  mark  the  eternity  of  the  sinner's  punishment,  which 
is  used  in  the  same  sentence  to  declare  the  eternity  of  the 
saint's  happiness.  "And  there  shall  go  away  mio  aionian 
punishmetitf  but  the  righteous  into  aioman  life  :'*  and  there  is 
no  reason,  except  the  mere  wish  of  the  wicked,  for  explain- 
ing the  one  to  mean  a  limited  duration,  more  than  the  other. 
There  is,  however,  the  best  possible  reason  for  denying  that 
it  is  to  be  so  understood  in  either  case.  This  takes  place  at 
the  day  of  judgment;  when  measured  periods  are  all  merged 
in  an  absolute  eternity.  All  temporal  lives  have  expired,  all 
earthly  dispensations  arc  abrogated ;  these  visible  heavens 
are  rolled  up  as  a  scroll,  and  the  elements  are  melted  with 
fervent  heat.  *'  Yet  once  more  I  shake  not  the  earth  only,  bu% 

^  On  Atonement,  p.  179.    C  rhe5s.  i.  7— .10 

Qq 


314 

**  also  heaven.  And  this  word,  yet  once  more,  signifieth 
**  the  removing  of  those  things  that  are  shaken,  as  of  things 
"  that  are  made,  that  those  things  \k?hich  cannot  he  shaken 
"  may  remain."* 

It  is  not  at  all  surprising,  that  my  opponent  and  his  breth- 
i-en  deny  that  there  is  to  be  a  day  of  judgment,  after  death. 
That  infidelity,  which  is  willing  to  wear  a  disguise,  consi- 
ders nothing  too  sacred  for  its  polluted  fingers.  The  reason 
which  they  give,  for  applying  thexxvth  chapter  of  Matthew 
to  temporal  events,  is,  that  there  is  some  appearance  of  the 
same  thing  being  done  by  our  Saviour,  in  Matt.  xvi.  27,  2S. 
"  For  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  the  glory  of  liis  Father, 
"  with  his  angels ;  and  then  he  shall  reward  every  man  ac- 
'*  cording  to  his  works.  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  there  be  some 
*'  standing  here,  which  shall  not  taste  of  death,  till  they  see 
*'  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  his  kingdom:''  or  as  Luke  says, 
**■  till  they  see  the  kingdom  of  God :"  or  as  Mark  says,  *'  till 
''  they  have  seen  the  kingdom  of  God  come  with  power.* 
Again  he  says,  in  predicting  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
'*  But  in  those  days,  after  that  tribulation,  the  sun  shall  be 
*'  darkened,  and  the  moon  shall  not  give  her  light;  and  the 
*'  stars  of  heaven  shall  fall,  and  the  powers  that  are  in  hea- 
*•  ven  shall  be  shaken.  And  tlien  sliall  they  sec  the  Son  of 
"  man  coming  in  the  clouds,  with  great  power  and  glory. 
**  And  then  shall  he  send  his  angels,  and  shall  gather  togeth- 
**  er  his  elect  from  the  four  winds,  from  the  uttermost  part 
"  of  the  earth,  to  the  uttermost  part  of  heaven."  **  Verily  I 
•'  say  unto  you,  that  this  generation  shall  not  pass,  till  all 
**'  these  things  be  done.*'x 

Here  are  predictions  of  the  coming  of  Christ,  in  glory, 
V!ith  his  angels,  to  gather  all  his  elect,  and  reward  every 
man  according  to  his  works.  It  is  to  be  accompanied  with 
the  darkening  of  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars  :  which  we  consi- 
der to  belong  to  the  general  judgment.  Yet  it  is  said  that 
all  these  things  shall  be  fulfilled  before  the  demise  of  that 
generation,  to  which  these  prophecies  were  addressed.  These 
are  among  the  craggy  cliffs  of  revelation,  which  many  sur- 
vey, but  few  surmount.  The  obstacles  are  often  of  our  own 
making.  Instead  of  seeking  for  the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  by 
comparing  spiritual  things  with  spiritual,  men  often  measura 
the  Sacred  Oracles  by  rules  of  human  invention,  and  thus 
create  difficulties,  where  things  would  otherwise  be  plain, 

w  Heb.  xii.  26,  27< 

i  Luk.c  ht.  27.  Mk.  »x.  1.  xiii.  ^i— 27,  3C. 


315 

That  many  prophecies  have  a  primary  and  an  ultimate  fufc- 
fihnent,  is  too  evident  to  require  elaborate  proof.  Before 
Samson's  birth,  God  told  the  mother  of  this  well  known  type 
of  Christ,  "The  child  shall  be  a  Nazarite."  This  had  a 
subordinate  fulfilment  a  short  time  after  the  prophecy  was 
uttered :  but  its  grand  accomplishment  is  recorded  in  the 
New  Testament.  "  And  he  came  and  dwelt  in  a  city  called 
**  Nazareth  :  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by 
*'  the  prophets,  he  shall  be  called  Nadzoraios,  a  Naza- 
"  rite.*^y  So  the  above  predictions  had  an  inceptive  accom- 
plishment in  that  generation  to  which  they  were  addressed. 
They  contemplated  the  resurrection  of  Christ  from  the  dead, 
bis  glorious  ascension  into  heaven,  the  powerful  effusion  of 
his  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  gathering  of  his  elect  into  the  visi- 
ble church,  under  the  administration  of  his  apostles  and  other 
ministers,  in  every  part  of  the  then  known  world.  There  was 
also  such  a  judging  of  the  sheep  and  the  goats,  according  to 
their  works,  as  was  foretold  by  Ezekiel ;  when  it  is  said, "  I 
**  will  feed  them  with  judgment.  And  as  for  you,  0  my  flock ! 
**  thus  saith  the  Lord  God  ;  behold  I  will  judge  between  cat- 
**  tie  and  cattle,  between  the  rams  and  the  he-goats."*  Such 
a  discrimination  was  made  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem: 
which  awful  event,  was,  according  to  the  account  of  Jose- 
phus,  accompanied  with  such  preternatural  phenomena,  in 
the  heavens  and  the  earth,  as  might  well  be  designated  by 
the  darkening  of  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars. 

But  surely  the  fallen  angels  were  not  destroyed  with  Je- 
rusalem. Jude  must  therefore  have  referred  to  some  other 
event,  when  he  told  us  that  they  were  "  reserved  in  everlast- 
**  ing  chains  under  darkness,  unto  the  judgment  of  the  great 
*■*  day.^'^  The  Scriptures  say  moreover,  concerning  men, 
**  Behold  the  Lord  cometh  with  ten  thousand  of  his  saints, 
**  to  execute  judgment  upon  all."  "  We  shall  all  stand  before 
"  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ."  A  similar  passage  of  the 
same  writer  is  thus  paraphrased  by  Macknight.  *'  For  we 
"■  must  all  [at  the  last  day,]  appear  [in  the  body]  before  the 
**  tribunal  of  [the  Lord]  Ciirist,  that  every  one  [of  us]  may 
«  receive  [from  him,]  rewards  and  punishments  in  the  body, 
*'  according  to  what  he  hath  done  [in  the  body]  whether  what 
"  he  hath  done  be  good  or  bad.''  "  Behold  he  cometh  with 
''  clouds,  and  every  eye  shall  see  him."    *'  The  Son  of  man 

y  Judges  xiii,  5.  Matt.  ii.  23.    Thus  it  is  explained  by  Diodati,  Dr.  Clark«» 
and  Pai-khurst.     See  the  latter  on  the  word. 
7.  Ez.  xxxjv.  17. 


31« 

**  shall  send  forth  his  angels,  and  they  shall  gather  out  of  his 
**  kingdom  all  things  that  offend,  and  them  which  do  iniquity." 
**  So  shall  it  be  at  the  end  of  the  world :  the  angels  shall 
**  come  forth,  and  sever  the  wicked  from  among  the  just."* 
*'  It  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,  but  after  this  the 
'*  judgment."  "For  the  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from 
**  heaven,  with  a  shout,  with  the  voice  of  the  arch-angel,  and 
"  with  the  trump  of  God :  and  the  dead  in  Christ  shall  rise 
**  first.  Then  we  which  are  alive,  and  remain,  shall  be  caught 
'•  up  together  with  them  in  the  clouds,  to  meet  the  Lord  in 
*'  the  air;  and  so  shall  we  ever  be  with  the  Lord.''  "  The 
"  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven,  with  his  mighty 
*  angels,  in  flaming  fire,  taking  vengeance  on  them  that 
"  know  not  God,  and  that  obey  not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Je- 
"  sus  Christ;  who  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  destruc- 
**  tion  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and  from  the  glory  of 
**  his  power ;  when  he  shall  come  to  be  glorified  in  his  saints, 
^  and  to  be  admired  in  all  them  that  believe."* 

As  Canaan  was  a  type  of  heaA  en,  so  was  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  a  figure  of  the  day  of  judgment:  thus  it  is  a.<J 
reasonable  to  confine  all  that  is  said  of  future  happiness  to 
the  land  of  Canaan,  as  to  restrict  all  the  above  texts  to  the 
temporal  judgments  by  which  Jerusalem  fell.  In  those  pas- 
sages, men  and  devils  are  the  subjects  of  this  judgment ; 
and  it  takes  place  at  the  end  of  the  world,  after  the  great 
body  of  mankind  have  died  and  arisen  again :  and  those  be- 
lievers which  are  alive  when  the  ti'umpet  sounds,  shall  be 
caught  up  in  the  clouds,  together  with  the  risen  saints,  to 
dwell  with  Christ  forever.  The  same  authorities  agree  with 
the  parable  of  the  wise  and  foolish  virgins,  and  that  of  the 
talented  servants,  and  many  other  passages  of  scripture,  in 
making  a  complete  separation  between  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked,  and  sending  the  latter  to  eternal  destruction.  That 
^is  is  the  doctrine  of  Matthew  xxvth,  must  be  plain  to  the 
candid  reader  of  God's  word.  "  When  the  Son  of  man  shall 
**  come  in  his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then 
*'  shall  he  sit  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory :  and  before  him 
'*  shall  be  gathered  all  nations ;  and  he  shall  separate  them 
"  one  from  another,  as  a  shepherd  divideth  his  sheep  from 
^*  the  goats :  and  he  shall  set  the  sheep  on  his  right  hand, 
''*  but  the  goats  on  the  left.  Then  shall  the  king  say  unto 
''  them  on  his  right  hand.  Come  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  in- 

a  Jude  vii.  14, 15.  Rom.  xiv  10.  2  Cor.v.  1 0.  Rev,  i.  7.  Matt.  xiii.  44,  49. 
Keb,  ix.  27.  I  Thess.  rr.  16, 17-  3  Thess.  i.  7—10. 


317 

**  herit  the  kingdom  prepared  for  you,  from  the  foundatioai 
**  of  the  world.''  *'  Then  shall  he  say  also  unto  them  on  the 
**  left  hand.  Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire, 
"  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels."  "  And  these  shall 
"  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment,  but  the  righteous  into 
**  everlasting  life/'^  With  a  becoming  deference  to  the  good 
sense  of  this  audience,  and  especially  with  a  sacred  regard 
to  the  authority  of  God,  speaking  in  his  word,  I  must  con- 
clude, that  those  texts,  in  which  aionios  is  connected  with  the 
punishment  of  the  wicked,  should  be  considered  affirmative 
evidence  of  the  absolute  eternity  of  that  punishimcnt^ 

RECAPITULATION. 

With  the  help  of  Almighty  God,  I  have  now  endeavoured 
to  shew  the  meaning  of  his  word,  in  support  of  the  truth, 
and  ill  answer  to  objections  which  are  made  against  it  : 
whether  these  objections  were  drawn  from  the  present  cha- 
racter and  sufferings  of  mankind,  the  general  offer  of  salva- 
tion, or  the  attributes  of  God;  whether  they  related  to  pur- 
gatory, or  restitution, or  fatherly  chastisements;  or  whether 
they  contemplated  the  will  of  God,  or  Christ's  prophetic^ 
kingly,  or  priestly  office. 

The  doctrine  for  which  the  church  of  God  has  ever  con- 
tended, has  been  faiily  inferred  from  the  scriptural  account 
of  God's  milder  and  severer  attributes,  and  the  guilty,  de- 
praved, and  helpless  condition  of  mankind.  It  has  been  shewn 
that  tliis  doctrine  is  often  implied^  in  the  use  of  such  scriptu- 
ral figures  as  insinuation,  supposition,  and  interrogation. 
This  doctrine  has  been  also  established,  by  the  contrast 
which  the  scriptures  mark,  between  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked,  in  relation  to  their  character,  standing  and  future 
destiny :  and  by  scriptural  negations,  or  denials  that  there  is 
any  end  to  the  punishment  of  the  wicked. 

The  affirmative  evidence  was  divided  into  two  branches  : 
the  first  of  which  related  to  the  state  of  the  damned.  In  this, 
the  doctrine  was  proved  by  those  scriptures  which  threaten 
the  wicked,  with  the  punishment  of  hell ;  whether  by  the 
name  of  Sheol,  Hades,,  Gehenna,  or  Tartarus.  The  second 
branch  of  this  argument  related  to  the  duration  of  punish- 
ment, and  was  founded  on  texts  which  declare  that  this  pun- 
ishment is  eternal,  or  shall  last /orever ;  whether  the  writers 

b  Matt,  XXV.  31—34^  41^  *&. 


convey  their  ideas  in  Hebrew  or  Greek;  whether  by  neje/j, 
otif  or  olam ;  or  by  aion,  eis  aiona^  or  aionios. 

The  texts  belonging  to  the  last  branch  of  the  last  argu- 
ment, assure  us  that  some  have  their  portion  in  the  mist  of 
darkness,— in  the  blackness  of  darkness, — in  the  lake  of  fire 
and  brimstone, — in  the  smoke  of  torment, — in  confusion, 
Bhame,  contempt,  reproach,  destruction,  damnation.  And 
this  is  declared,  in  the  unlimited  sense  of  the  words  to  be 
foieA^er,  for  ever  and  ever,  everlasting,  perpetual,  eternal. 
W  bile  a  God  of  infinite  truth  speaks  such  language,  his  peo- 
ple must  believe,  that  he  will  punish  the  finally  impenitent 
and  unbelieving,  to  an  absolute  eternity. 

CONCLUSION. 

This  point  of  faith,  like  all  other  articles  of  the  Christian 
creed,  is  calculated,  tlirough  grace,  to  promote  the  temporal 
welfare  and  the  eternal  salvation  of  men.  It  is  rash  for  its 
enemies  to  impeach  its  moral  tendency.  Yet  my  opponent 
has  just  now  insinuated,  that  its  advocates  do  not  entirely 
agree  with  the  apostle,  in  his  wish  that  all  *' may  lead  a 
*•  quiet  and  peaceable  life,  in  all  godliness,  and  honesty," 
but  that  they  would  allow  of  a  little  turbulence,  a  little  im- 
piety, and  a  little  dishonesty.''  Now  that  I  think  of  it,  I 
should  be  obliged  to  that  lady,  who  sent  me  this  fan,  which 
has  yielded  me  so  much  refreshment  during  tliis  debate,  if 
she  would,  when  convenient,  have  the  kindness  to  let  me 
know,  how  it  may  be  returned  to  its  owner.  As  far  as  I  un- 
derstand the  principles  in  question,  they  have,  through  the 
Spirit  of  Christ,  a  tendency  to  preserve  their  possessors  from 
dishonesty,  even  to  the  value  of  a  fan  or  a  pin.  Insinuations 
of  this  sort,  come  with  a  peculiarly  ill  grace  from  Univer- 
salists,  and  especially  fi-om  that  sect  to  which  my  opponent 
belongs.  An  inquiry  into  the  connexion  of  principles  and 
practice,  will,  by  no  means,  redound  to  their  honour.  For 
the  general  promotion  of  piety,  sobriety,  and  honesty,  men 
should  have  correct  views  of  their  moral  disease,  and  of  the 
remedy  which  God  has  appointed  for  it.  The  scriptures  put 
in  requisition,  all  the  resources  of  language,  in  order  to  de- 
scribe the  malignity  and  odiousness  of  sin,  and  the  love  and 
condescension  of  God,  in  the  cross  of  Christ;  by  which  we 
are  crucified  to  the  world,  and  the  world  to  us.  Yet  my  op-: 
ponent's  religion  makes  sin  a  mere  negation,  and  the  atone- 

e  MinnteB  p.  395: 


319 

ment  a  downright  imposition.  ^'  They  that  be  whole  need  not 
«  a  physician,  but  they  that  are  sick."  Those  who  make  a 
mock  at  sin,  will  not  apply  to  a  divine  Saviour,  for  pardon 
and  sanctification  :  and  without  him  they  will  never  be  truly 
wise,  holy  or  upright.  Their  practice  supports  this  position. 
Universalism  never  was  known  to  reform  a  sinner :  but  it 
has  been  the  means  of  depraving  many  a  sober  man,  and  of 
blasting  the  fair  prospects  of  many  a  family.  Universalism 
never  attempts  to  mortify  the  lustof  theflesii,  the  lust  of  the 
eye,  and  the  pride  of  life;  while  all  its  energies  are  exerted, 
to  keep  men  from  being  too  religious  themselves,  and  from 
labouring  for  the  conversion  of  others. 

If  ever  piety,  purity,  and  righteousness  were  found  oh 
earth,  they  have  been  found  in  the  blood-bought  church  of 
Christ  Yet  this  church  has  ever  held,  with  an  unyielding 
pertinacity,  the  eternity  of  future  rewards  and  punishments. 
They  have  ever  viewed  sin  with  abhorrence,  and  have  pre- 
ferred truth  and  holiness,  to  the  enjoyment  of  reputation, 
property,  or  life.  Permit  one  who  has  tasted  the  bitterness 
of  sin,  to  add  his  feeble  testimony  to  their  general  voice. 
Although  I  have  conscientiously  defended  the  truth,  with  a 
desire  for  your  salvation,  if  God  were  to  judge  me,  out  of 
Christ,  I  am  lost  fi»r  ever.  I  have  committed  sin  enough  in 
this  debate,  to  damn  a  world,  if  it  were  imputed  to  it.  If  God 
were  to  lay  justice  to  the  line,  and  righteousness  to  the  plum- 
met, and  deal  with  me,  independently  of  Christ*s  atonement, 
I  confess  that  I  cannot  answer  for  the  way  in  which  I  advo- 
cate his  cause,  or  call  upon  his  name.  It  is  this  which  endear* 
to  me  the  cross  of  Christ,  and  it  is  this  which  makes  my  heart 
bleed  with  compassion  for  your  precious  souls.  The  pleasure 
of  serving  your  spiritual  interests,  has  far  outweighed  that 
bodily  sickness  and  weakness  which  has  excited  your  sym- 
pathy. In  the  truth,  there  is  an  indescribable  loveliness;  and 
in  the  sweet  hope,  that  God  will  bless  his  word,  to  your  con- 
viction, conversion,  and  edification,  thei-e  is  an  unspeakabW 
comi'oi-t.  My  flesh  and  my  heart  fail ;  but  thou,  0  God,  art 
flie  strength  of  my  heart,  and  my  portion  forever. 


JERRATd. 

In  page  142,  line  20,  for  This  read  The 

U6,  line  4  from  bottom,  for  has  read  ha»U 

172,  hne  12,  for  cAa,vn  read  chain. 

176,  line  12,  for  several  read  *ex»ere»- 

182,  note,  before  kindness  m.en  profemonal. 

208,Imel6,for;AaireadMa«. 

225,  line  29,  for  mead  read  meec/. 


ADVERTISEMENT. 


DISCUSSION  or  BAPTISM. 

In  June,  1820,  there  was,  in  Mount  Pleasant,  Jefferson  county,  Ohio,  a 
public  debate  on  Baptism,  between  Mr.  John  Walker,  a  minister  of  the  As- 
sociate Church,  and  Mr.  Alexander  Campbell,  an  Arian  Baptist.  At  the 
close  of  that  conferencp,  Mr  Campbell  spoke  as  follows,  viz.  "  I  have  now 
"  accepted  the  invitation  or  challenge  of  the  Seceders,  and  having  now  fully 
"  satisfied  their  most  eager  desires  for  an  interview  of  this  kind,  I  conceive 
*'  it  is  my  time  to  give  an  invitation  or  challenge  to  any  fedo-Baptist  mi- 
"  nister;  and  to  return  the  compliment  with  the  utmost  ceremoniousness, 
*'  I  this  day  publish  to  all  present,  that  I  feel  disposed  to  meet  any  Pedo- 
"  Baptist  minister  of  any  denomination,  of  good  standing  in  his  party,  and 
"  I  engage  to  prove  in  a  debate  with  him,  either  uiua  uoce,  or  with  the  pen, 
"  that  Infant  Sprinkling  is  a  human  tradition,  and  injurious  to  the  well- 
*'  being  of  society  religious  and  political.  I  have  to  add,  that  I  must  have 
"  an  equal  vote,  in  determining  the  time  and  place.  This  is  the  only  re- 
"  striction  I  attach  to  the  challenge  I  now  publish."  This  professed  chal- 
lenge, as  its  author  repeatedly  calls  it,  was  published  in  Mr.  Campbell's 
printed  account  of  the  debate,  which  Mr.  Walker  afterward  proved  to  be 
spurious.  In  consequence  of  an  application  from  an  important  friend  and 
partizan  of  Mr.  Campbell's,  I  was  induced,  in  the  year  1823,  to  send  him 
an  acceptance  of  his  challenge.  This  introduced  a  correspondence,  which 
terminated  in  a  public  conference  of  seven  days  in  Washington,  Mason 
county,  Kentucky,  in  October  1823.  There  was  no  stenographer  engaged. 
Yet  Mr.  Campbell  has  been  so  kind  as  to  write  a  volume  of  speeches  for  me, 
without  my  ever  thinking  of  imposing  such  a  task  upon  him.  If  God  per- 
mit, the  merits  of  his  performance,  and  the  character  and  testimony  of  his 
friends  who  have  aided  him,  and  certified  for  him,  may  be  the  subject  of  free 
animadversion,  hereafter.  This  controversy  is  as  interesting  in  Kentucky, 
as  Universalism  is  in  Philadelphia.  The  reason  is,  that  Arianism  and  all 
other  evils,  are  brought  in  under  the  cloak  of  Anti-Pedobaptism.  Real 
Christian  Baptists  are  the  objects  of  my  sincere  love.  Am'ong  them,  I  have 
dear  relatives  and  friends  in  the  West  and  in  the  East.  Mr.  Campbell 
would  deprive  me  of  their  friendship  by  writing  speeches  for  me.  When 
Providence  will  permit  me,  in  consistency  with  pastoral  duties,  and  a  pro- 
per regard  to  health,  it  is  my  earnest  wish,  and  my  fixed  design  to  publish  my 
own  argument,  with  Mr.  Campbell,  as  I  have  with  Mr.  Kneeland.  And  that 
I  have  the  means  of  doing  it,  Mr.  Campbell  well  knows,  since  he  made  as 
frequent  and  as  doleful  complaints  of  my  little  book,  as  did  the  Universalist 
champion.  Meanwhile  I  wish  it  to  be  understood  that  I  do  not  consider 
myself  responsible  for  the  follies  which  Mr.  Campbell  may  forge  for  me. 

W.  L.  M'C. 


^1012  01029  3423 


